THe  TABeRNACLe 

ITS  HISTORY  &STRUCTURe 


>«t'; 


>^j.v 


iri>;, 


,'*!?' 


->' 


'J  >.^v  . 


>  ^fi!  '^' . 


BY  TH€  Rev. W.SHAW  CALD€COTT 


1^5  1  !96 

<#  *^  ♦       I  '     ^    S-*     ^-^ 


The   Tabernacle 

Its    History    and    Structure 


I.  Conventional  Tabernacle.         2.  Fergusson's  Restoration. 
3.  Tabernacle  of  Text. 


The  Tabernacle 


Its  History 
and  ^  ^  ^ 
Structure  ^ 


By  the  Rev.  W.  Shaw  Caldecott 

{Member  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society) 


With  a  Preface  by  the  Rev.  A.  H.  Sayce,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

{Professor  of  Assyriology  at  Oxford  University) 


Our  pursuit  is  to  look  after  the  things  themselves,  leaving  the  allegorizing 
of  them  unto  others.— Dr.  John  Lightfoot,  1650. 


PHILADELPHIA 

THE    UNION    PRESS,    1122   CHESTNUT   Street 

1904 


PREFACE. 

By  the  Rev.  A.  H.  SAYCE,  D.D.,  LL.D.  (Professor  of  Assyriology  at  the 
Oxford  University). 


MR.  CALDECOTT  has  written  a  very  interesting 
volume.  He  has  been  content  to  study  the  Old 
Testament  books  themselves  instead  of  the  commentators 
upon  them,  and  the  result  is  an  unconventional  and 
original  work.  He  has  shown  that  there  are  discoveries 
yet  to  be  made  in  the  text  of  the  Old  Testament  by  those 
who  will  put  aside  traditional  interpretations  and  examine 
what  the  Hebrew  writers  have  actually  said.  All  the  new 
views  put  forward  by  him  are,  of  course,  not  likely  to  win 
general  assent :  that  is  the  case  with  all  pioneering  work. 
It  is  sufficient  if  the  most  important  of  them  prove  to  be 
established  on  a  firm  basis  of  fact. 

The  kernel  of  the  book  is  the  history  and  architecture 
of  the  Tabernacle.  There  are  mathematical  calculations 
involved  in  the  architectural  restoration  of  the  Israelitish 
sanctuary  into  which  I  will  not  f  oUow  him ;  they  must  be 
left  to  the  professional  mathematician.  It  is  naturally 
only  that  part  of  Mr.  Caldecott's  researches  which  deals 
with  subjects  familiar  to  me  about  which  I  am  qualified 
to  write. 


vi  PREFACE. 

He  has  made  considerable  use  of  the  much-neglected 
materials  contained  in  the  Books  of  the  Chronicles,  and 
has  shown  that  when  properly  understood  they  are  worthy 
of  more  credit  than  criticism  nowadays  is  disposed  to 
allow.  That  David  should  have  left  *  plans  '  of  the  future 
temple-buildings  behind  him  may  seem  too  modern  an 
idea  to  many  readers,  but  it  is  borne  out  by  archaeological 
fact.  Such  plans  were  made  in  Egypt  and  Babylonia 
centuries  before  the  days  of  David,  and  some  of  them  have 
survived  to  our  own  time.  The  profession  of  the  architect 
is  immensely  old  in  the  civilised  East. 

One  of  the  points  upon  which  he  has  rightly  insisted  is 
the  historical  importance  of  the  destruction  of  Shiloh.  It 
is  a  point  to  which  I  also  have  drawn  attention  in  my 
Early  History  of  the  Hebrews.  That  there  should  be  no 
detailed  account  of  it  in  the  Old  Testament  is  not 
surprising  ;  Shiloh  was  the  centre  and  home  of  what 
literary  culture  there  was  in  Israel  during  the  stormy 
period  of  the  Judges,  and  its  destruction  necessarily  meant 
a  break  in  the  literary  and  annalistic  record.  It  would 
have  been  at  the  central  sanctuary  only  that  a  yearly 
chronicle  of  events  could  be  kept. 

The  destruction  of  Shiloh  seems  to  correspond  with  an 
archaeological  fact  which  is  but  just  forcing  itself  upon 
our  notice.  The  earliest  monument  of  the  so-called 
'  Phoenician '  alphabet  still  remains  the  Moabite  Stone,  the 
date  of  which  is  the  ninth  century  before  our  era.  The 
excavations  which  have  been  carried  on  by  the  Palestine 
Exploration  Fund  on  the  sites  of  various  ancient  cities  in 
the  south  of  Canaan  have  failed  to  bring   to   light  any 


PREFACE.  vii 

earKer  relic  of  the  '  Phcenician '  alphabet.  The  same 
result  has  followed  on  the  Austrian  excavations  at 
Taanach,  where  the  Canaanitish  population  does  not 
appear  to  have  submitted  to  Israelitish  rule  until  the 
reigns  of  David  and  Solomon.  Before  that  date  whatever 
written  documents  have  been  found  have  been  in  the 
language  and  cuneiform  script  of  Babylonia.  At  Taanach 
the  official  records  were  kept  in  cuneiform,  and  it  is 
probable  that  what  was  the  case  at  Taanach  was  the  case 
also  in  other  cities  of  the  country.  In  the  Tel  el-Amarna 
tablets  of  the  century  before  the  Exodus  there  is  no  trace 
of  any  other  script  being  known. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Tyrian  annals  translated  into 
Greek  by  Menander  must  have  been  written  in  *  Phoenician  * 
letters,  and  we  know  from  Josephus  that  they  went  back 
to  Hiram,  the  son  of  Abibal,  the  contemporary  of  David 
and  Solomon.  In  the  Book  of  Judges  we  have  in  the  Song 
of  Deborah  and  Barak  a  poem  which  is  contemporaneous 
with  the  events  to  which  it  refers.  Supposing  that  it 
was  handed  down  in  writing  and  not  orally — and  the 
allusion  to  *  the  staff  of  the  scribe '  in  Judges  v.  14  raises 
a  presumption  in  favour  of  this — was  it  originally  written 
in  cuneiform  characters  or  in  the  letters  of  the  *  Phoenician' 
alphabet  ?  If  in  the  latter,  the  archaeological  absence  of 
any  early  example  of  the  *  Phoenician '  script  is,  to  say 
the  least,  difficult  to  explain^  It  may  be,  then,  that  the 
destruction  of  Shiloh  marks  the  break  between  the  old 
culture  and  the  new,  between  the  use  of  the  cuneiform 
syllabary  and  the  Babylonian  language  that  went  along 
with  it,  and  that  of  the  '  Phoenician '  alphabet  and  the 


viii  PEEFACE. 

Canaanitish  or  Hebrew  tongue.  The  importance  of  the 
fact  in  its  relation  not  only  to  Israelitish  history  but  also 
to  the  composition  and  text  of  the  older  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  need  not  be  pointed  out. 

In  his  restoration  of  the  architecture  of  the  Tabernacle, 
Mr.  Caldecott  seems  to  me  to  have  been  successful.  At 
all  events,  if  it  is  admitted,  the  Biblical  description  of  the 
building  becomes  intelligible  and  self-consistent.  That 
more  than  one  cubit  was  employed  in  its  measurement  is 
what  would  be  expected  by  anyone  who  was  acquainted 
with  the  metrology  of  ancient  Babylonia  or  who  had  lived 
in  modern  Egypt.  It  is  only  with  his  interpretation  of 
the  Senkereh  tablet,  or  rather  of  the  ideographs  found  in 
it,  that  I  must  part  company  from  the  author. 

His  book  once  more  impresses  upon  us  the  necessity  of 
archaeological  research  in  Palestine.  There  are  questions 
suggested  by  it  which  can  be  settled  only  by  the  spade  of 
the  excavator.  If  Mr.  Caldecott  is  right  in  his  theory  as 
to  the  origin  of  the  Rdmet  el-Khalil  near  Hebron,  a  new 
light  will  be  cast  on  the  social  and  religious  condition  of 
Israel  in  the  age  of  Samuel.  And  in  reading  what  he  has 
to  say  about  Shiloh,  more  than  once  I  have  been  inclined 
to  exclaim :  *  Oh  that  the  site  could  be  archaeologically 
explored  ! '  Until  Palestine  has  been  made  to  yield  up 
its  buried  past  like  Egypt  and  Babylonia,  the  Old 
Testament  will  remain  a  battle-ground  for  disputants  who 
have  no  solid  basis  of  fact  on  which  to  stand. 


a.  /y. 


1 


IXTRODUCTION. 


I  WRITE  from  the  once  Holy  City,  and  am  happy  in 
knowing  that  the  object  of  my  visit  to  Palestine  has 
been  satisfactorily  attained.  Let  me  say,  in  brief,  what 
that  object  was,  and  in  what  manner  the  problems  that 
I  brought  with  me  have  been  solved.  I  came  prepared 
with  a  literary  demonstration  of  the  cubit  of  the  Bible, 
as  given  to  the  Eoyal  Asiatic  Society  ^  and  included 
in  this  volume.  That  instrument  I  was  desirous  of 
applying,  as  a  test  both  of  itself  and  of  the  subject,  to  the 
most  remarkable  ruin  within  the  limits  of  the  ancient 
Jewish  State.^  When  I  say  *ruin'  I  limit  the  term  to 
include  only  buildings  dedicated  to  the  worship  of  God 
or  the  service  of  man.  The  special  ruin  to  which  I  refer 
is  a  large  rectangular  ground-figure  enclosed  within 
monolithic  stone  walls,  standing  near  to,  though  not 
visible  from,  the  ancient  highway  leading  from  Jerusalem 
to  Hebron.  Countless  travellers  have  looked  on  this 
mysterious  handiwork  of  man  with  reverence  and  wonder. 
Each  must  have  speculated  as  to  who  reared  its  massive 
masonry,   and    for   what   purpose.     Archaeologists    have 

1  Reproduced  in  this  volume  as  Part  II.  p.  107  et  seq. 

2  See  Dr.  Edward  Eobinson's  descriptions  in  Part  I,  Chapter  2,  pp.  42,  43. 


X  INTRODUCTION. 

agreed  that  we  have  not  here  the  remains  of  a  church. 
Nor  could  these  low  walls  of  solid  stone  have  been  those 
of  any  military  fortification,  as  the  work  is  of  too  refined 
and  time- en  grossing  a  character  to  have  been  done  for 
the  purposes  of  war.  The  questions  remain,  to  whom 
do  we  owe  these  vast  substructions,  and  for  what 
purpose  were  they  laid  ?  To  these  questions  I  believed 
that  I  had  an  answer,  and  I  was  supremely  anxious  to 
visit  Rdmet  el-Khdlil  and  to  satisfy  myself  on  certain 
points  before  giving  that  answer  to  the  world. 

For  this  purpose  I  made  my  way  to  Hebron,  where 
I  was  received  with  the  most  cordial  hospitality  by 
Dr.  and  Mrs.  Paterson,  of  the  United  Free  Church 
Medical  Mission,  stationed  there.  From  Dr.  Paterson 
I  also  received  much-needed  and  invaluable  assistance  in 
taking  measurements,  and  in  making  other  arrangements 
necessary  in  a  population  so  hostile  to  Christians  as  is 
that  of  Hebron  to-day. 

As  I  am  publishing,  with  this,  a  reconstructed  plan 
of  the  enclosure,  together  with  sundry  photographs  of  it, 
I  do  not  need  to  add  many  topographical  details.  I  may, 
however,  be  allowed  to  show  the  significance  of  some 
figures  given  in  the  drawing  of  the  Plan  of  reconstruction. 
The  first  and  in  some  respects  the  cardinal  result  attained 
by  my  measurements  is  a  conviction  that  the  Rdmet 
ruin  is  a  work  of  Jewish,  or  rather  of  Israelitish  origin, 
and  that  the  standard  of  length  used  in  its  construction 
is  that  of  the  newly-discovered  Hebrew  cubit.  The 
thickness  of  the  walls  throughout,  where  perfect,  is  a 
good  illustration  of  this  fact.     The  foundation,  wherever 


USTTRODITCTIOK  xi 

visible,  has  a  uniform  thickness  of  6  feet,  or  5  cubits. 
The  foundation  being  built  of  this  dimension  to  the  level 
of  the  interior,  it  is  then  rebated  or  reduced  by  the  length 
of  a  single  cubit,  and  is  44-  feet  through.  Its  height  above 
the  foundation  is  6  cubits  (7  ft.  2'4ins.),  each  of  the  two 
courses  of  stone  having  an  average  height  of  3ft.  Tins., 
as  stated  in  the  Survey  of  Western  Palestine ^  published  by 
the  Palestine  Exploration  Fund  Society  (vol.  iii.  p.  322). 

A  similar  harmony  runs  throughout  the  whole  series 
of  actual  measurements,  the  unbroken  building  cubit  of 
a-foot-and-a-fifth  being  the  common  denominator  of  all 
the  dimensions  of  original  work  still  standing.^  This 
is  particularly  noticeable  in  the  diameter  of  the  well, 
which  has  a  measure  of  8  cubits  (9^-  feet),  and  is 
surrounded  by  a  platform  15  cubits  in  the  square 
(18  feet). 

One  could  not  expect  a  structure  that  may  have 
resisted  the  weathering  influence  of  three  thousand 
years  to  show  as  crisp  and  exact  a  set  of  figures  as  it 
did  when  first  erected.  Nor  must  we  leave  out  of 
view  the  depredations  of  an  ignorant  peasantry.  Of 
this  there  is  a  somewhat  obvious  case  in  the  rough 
chiselling  of  one  of  the  border  stones  of  the  well- 
platform  into  a  trough  out  of  which  small  cattle  may 
drink.     Happily  the  stone  is  still  in  situ. 

Nor  are  the  four  walls  which  formed  the  enclosure 
perfect.     That  on  the  south  side  is  in  an  almost  unbroken 

1  This  fact  is  of  the  first  importance,  as  Hebrew  architects  and  builders 
did  not  usually  use  fractions  in  conjunction  ^ith  whole  cubits.  For  measures 
less  than  a  single  cubit,  see  pp.  220,  223. 


xii  INTEODUCTION. 

condition,  many  of  its  stones  being  12  and  15  feet  in 
length,  laid  without  mortar,  and  truly  squared.  The 
west  wall  is  in  fair  condition,^  as  is  a  portion  on  the  north 
side.  The  east  wall  has  almost  completely  disappeared, 
though  its  line  can  still  be  traced.  There  is  thus  no 
difficulty  in  determining  the  size  of  the  enclosure  as 
originally  constructed.  To  this  point  the  greatest 
interest  attaches,  as  it  is  well  established  that  every 
sacred  area  amongst  the  Jews  was  not  built  upon  by 
its  surrounding  wall,  but  was  enclosed  by  it.  Keeping 
this  principle  in  view,  I  was  careful  to  see  if  there  were 
any  relation  in  size  between  the  area  enclosed  at  Rdmet 
and  the  primitive  court  of  the  Tabernacle — which,  in  the 
times  of  the  Judges,  stood  successively  at  Gilgal,  Shiloh, 
Nob,  and  Gibeon.  As  the  large  or  ground-cubit  was  used 
in  all  such  delimitations,  we  know  from  Exodus  that  the 
People's  or  Altar  Court  of  the  Tabernacle  was  a  square  of 
50  cubits  or  75  English  feet,  and  that  the  great  Altar 
of  Sacrifice  stood  on  its  western  line,  equidistant  from  its 
two  ends.  Judge  of  my  surprised  delight  when  I  found 
that  the  Rdmet  enclosure  gave  a  square  of  100  cubits  or 
150  English  feet  in  the  clear,^  showing  it  to  have  had  an 
area  exactly  four  times  that  of  the  Tabernacle  Court  of 
"VYorship.  The  growth  of  the  nation  in  the  centuries  that 
passed  between  the  great  Lawgiver  and  the  last  of  the 
Judges  would  make  such  an  enlargement  necessary. 


1  See   photographs    of    portions   of   its   interior  and   exterior,    opposite 
pp.  3  and  17. 

2  Not  including  those  portions  of  the  foundation  built  only  to  the  level  of 
the  floor. 


^ 


^  o 


INTRODUCTION.  xiii 

I  must  no  longer  conceal  from  my  readers  tlie  fact  that 
the  theory  which  I  took  with  me  to  Palestine,  and  which 
I  wished  to  test  by  an  appeal  to  the  topography  of 
Bdmet,  was  that  the  enclosure  now  standing  was  built  to 
surround  with  a  stone  fence  'the  Altar  to  Jehovah  that 
Samuel  built  in  Ramah/  about  1050  B.C.  (1  Samuel  vii.  17). 

In  furtherance  of  the  correctness  of  this  view  let  me 
enlarge  for  a  moment  on  the  requirements  of  such  an 
altar,  as  deduced  from  all  that  we  know  of  the  Mosaic 
economy  of  sacrifice.  Having  an  east  aspect  as  an 
essential/  there  would  require  to  be,  in  addition  to  the 
altar-court  in  which  the  people  assembled,  space  for  the 
ministrations  of  the  priests  and  for  the  slaying  of  the 
sacrifices. 

In  the  Tabernacle  these  ends  were  attained  by  the 
curtaining  of  a  second  square  of  75  feet  lying  to  the  west. 
There  being  no  Tabernacle  at  Ramah,  a  compromise  was 
effected,  by  which  a  space  about  equal  to  one-third  of  the 
Great  Court  was  included  within  the  stone-walling.  The 
interior  length  of  the  enclosure  is  204  feet,  it  having  been 
imperative  that  the  additional  width  of  54  feet  should  be 
measurable  either  by  the  large  cubit  for  Survey  purposes 
or  by  the  medium  cubit  for  building  purposes.  I  need 
not  point  out  that  54  feet  is  equal  to  36  large  and  45 
medium  cubits. 

The  present  condition  of  the  ruin  shows  that  the  added 
54  feet  was,  at  one  end  of  the  addition,  divided  into  three 

^  The  north  and  south  walls  at  Bdmet  run  east,  with  an  inclination  of 
4°  to  the  south,  as  recorded  in  the  third  Yolume  of  the  Survey  of  Western 
Falestine. 


xiv  INTRODUCTIOK 

squares  of  equal  size.  There  are,  as  partially  shown  in 
one  of  the  photographs,  two  paved  platforms  (of  different 
heights  of  paving)  in  the  south-west  corner  of  the  Rdmet 
enclosure.  Each  of  these  is  a  square  of  18  feet,  a  third 
square  of  the  same  size  intervening  between  them  and  the 
line  of  the  large  quadrangle  in  which  the  altar  stood. 
This  third  square  was  probably  used  as  a  wood-pile  for  the 
altar  fires,  the  centre  square  as  the  place  for  the  laver,  and 
the  corner  square  still  retains  its  intended  use  as  that  in 
which,  the  well  was  dug  that  supplied  water  for  the  washing 
of  the  sacrifices  and  the  repeated  ablutions  of  the  priests. 
It  is  not  necessary  here  to  linger  over  minor  points  of 
coincidence,  though  there  are  many  such.^  But  I  cannot 
omit  a  short  reference  to  the  well  itself.  This  is,  without 
exception,  the  finest  bit  of  ancient  masonry  in  the  Land 
of  the  Bible.  Each  stone  is  squared  and  set  without 
mortar.  The  well,  fed  by  an  interior  spring,  was 
brimming  full  of  clear  water  when  I  saw  it,  but  each 
stone  visible  had  a  concave  face,  without  margin  or  boss. 
The  stones  are  not  of  a  uniform  size  or  thickness,  but 
each  concentric  circle  or  course  was  completely  formed 
of  full- sized  stones,  all  of  the  same  thickness.  No  such 
careful  and  elaborate  work  as  this  well  shows  is  to  be  seen 
anywhere  else  in  Palestine,  so  far  as  my  reading  and 
observation  go. 

1  The  most  obvious  of  these  is,  perhaps,  that  of  the  ledges  as  shown  in  the 
'interior'  photograph  and  refeiTed  to  in  the  table  of  references  on  the 
reconstruction  plan.  The  length  of  these  was  possibly  determined  by  the  size 
of  the  stone  slabs  which  rested  on  them,  as  they  are  not  uniform  and  do  not 
conform  to  the  whole-cubic  principle.  As  such  tables  were  not  ordered  in  the 
specification,  a  certain  latitude  may  have  been  taken  in  their  construction. 


I]S^TR0D1TCTI0]N".  xv 

Let  me  add  a  few  words  of  description  as  to  the 
desecration  which  has  been  allowed  to  take  place  at 
Rdmet  in  quite  recent  times.  The  Fellaheen  have  been 
permitted  to  build  two  walls  of  rubble  stone  across  the 
enclosure,  dividing  it  into  three  nearly  equal  parts.  Two 
of  the  three  spaces  thus  created  have  been  made  into 
gardens  by  carrying  some  tons  of  earth  to  overlay  the 
rock.  The  space  to  the  west  in  which  the  well  stands 
is  comparatively  clear.  All  search  for  the  main  entrance 
gate  in  the  centre  of  the  east  wall  is  further  barred  by 
the  erection,  within  the  enclosure,  of  a  rubble  house, 
untenanted.  Without  the  line  of  this  wall  lie  great 
heaps  of  stones  piled  in  confusion.  Were  the  earth  and 
stones  that  now  encumber  it  removed,  the  question  of 
Samuel's  possible  connection  with  the  Rdmet  el-KhaUl 
could  be  finally  and  authoritatively  settled.  The  sills  of 
the  north  door  and  east  gate  might  be  recovered,  and  even 
the  foundation  of  the  altar-base  might  be  distinguishable. 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  this  work  will  not  be  left  to 
private  enterprise.  The  one  man  to  whom  it  should  be 
entrusted  is  Mr.  Macalister,  the  Officer  of  the  Palestine 
Exploration  Fund,  now  working  with  a  band  of  trained 
excavators  in  Palestine.  Should  he  be  set  to  do  the  work 
of  verification,  the  confidence  of  the  public  in  the  accuracy 
of  any  report  that  he  may  make  will  be  secured,  and,  in  my 
belief,  the  Rdmet  el-Khdlily  when  scientifically  examined, 
will  take  its  place  as  at  once  the  oldest  and  most  authentic 
Palestinian  memorial  of  Israel's  past  religious  history. 

In  concluding  this  very  imperfect  sketch  of  the  origin 
and  probable  use  of  a  monument  which  may  be  found 


xvi  INTRODUCTIOIS'. 

to  antedate  the  establishment  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy, 
and  incidentally  to  settle  the  greatest  unsolved  problem 
of  Biblical  geography,  i.e.  the  locality  of  Samuers 
Ramah,  I  may  be  permitted  to  refer  to  the  encourage- 
ment given  to  me  to  make  these  investigations  by 
Sidney  Hill,  Esq.,  of  Langford  House,  Langford,  Somerset, 
and  to  my  own  sense  of  pleasure  at  being  able  to  put 
the  results  of  them  into  such  a  permanent  record  as  we 
have  before  us  in  this  volume. 

W.   SHAW  CALDECOTT. 
Jerusalem. 

Fehrmry,  1904. 


CONTENTS 

Preface  by  the  Rev.  Professoe  A.H.  Sayce,  D.D.,LL.D. 
Introduction"       ........  ix 

PART   I 

THE  HISTORY  OF   THE   TABERNACLE 

Chapter  I 

TO   THE  DESTRUCTION  OF   SHILOH 

The  Start  from  Sinai — First  arrival  at  Kadesh — First  departure 
from  Kadesh — Second  arrival  at  Kadesh — Second  departure 
from  Kadesh — Death  of  Aaron— The  Edomite  route  taken — 
Early  Stages — Passage  of  the  Jordan— The  Tabernacle  at 
Gilgal— Removed  to  Shiloh— Decay  of  Faith— Fall  of  Shiloh— 
Returned  to  Gilgal — Defeat  of  the  Philistines  .         .         .         1-34 

Chapier  II 

TO  THE  BUILDIXG   OF  THE  TEMPLE 

History  of  the  Tabernacle — Samuel's  Last  Days — His  Altar  at 
Ramah — The  functions  of  Sacrifice — Bdmet  el-Khalil — The 
Ramet  Enclosure  —  Saul's  Aisit  to  Samuel  —  His  retmn  to 
Gibeon — Tabernacle  removed  to  Nob— Identification  of  Xob — 
Sennacherib  on  Xob — The  Tabernacle  at  Gibeon — Massacre  of 
the  Gibeonites  —  Gibeon  as  a  Capital  —  Tabernacle  Site  at 
Gibeon — A  second  Tabernacle  —  Eise  of  Obed-Edom — Ark 
brought  to  Jerusalem — Public  Worship  reorganized — Theophany 
on  Moriah — Altar  built  on  Moriah — Three  centres  of  Worship — 
David's  Plans  for  the  Temple — Descendants  of  Moses — Solomon 
becomes  King — Temple  Ser%-ice  organized — Courts  of  Law 
readjusted— Ecclesiastical  towns  revised — Reduction  of  Priestly 
towns — Reduction  of  Kohathite  towns — Reduction  of  Merarite 
towns — Discontent  removed — High-priesthood  settled — Taber- 
nacle history  ended — '  The  second  Priest '         ....     35-104 


xviii  CONTENTS. 

PART  II 

THE  TEIPLE  CUBIT  OF  BABYLONIA 

Chapter  I 

OX  THE  RECONSTRUCTION   OF  THE  SENKEREH  TABLET 

Glossary  of  principal   Cuneiform  characters  used  in  the  Senkereh         page 
Tablet — The  Senkereh  Mathematical  Tablet — History  of  the 
Tablet — The  Tablet  columns — Deductions  from  the  Tablet — 
Fraction  signs— Value  signs— Arithmetical  sign       .         .         .  105-139 

Chapter   II 
THE  RESTORATION   OF    THE    SCALE    OF    GUDEA    AND    ITS 

COINCIDENCES  WITH   THE   SENKEREH  TABLET 
History  of  the  Scale   of    Gudea  —  The  Scale  itself  —  Length   of 
the   Scale — Cuttings  on  the  Scale — Palm  of  the  Scale — The 
Sexagesimal   System — Application    of   the   Scale — Babylonian 
length -measures 140-156 

PART  III 

THE   TRIPLE   CUBIT   OF   BABYLONIA   AS   USED   IN 
THE   CONSTRUCTION  OP   THE  TABERNACLE 
Chapter  I 
THE    ADJUNCTS    AND   ACCESSORIES    OF    THE   TABERNACLE 
The  Biblical  Cubit  announced — '  Cubits '  of  three  lengths — Hebrew 
conservatism  —  Size   of    the    Tabernacle   Court  —  The   Court 
Enclosure— Plan   of  the  Court— The  Gate  of  Sacrifice— The 
Gate  of  Worship — Vestibule  of  the  East  Gate — Dimensions  of 
the  Great  Altar — Position  of  the  Great  Altar — Pre-Tabernacle 
Tent  of  Worship  —  Pillars   of  the  Tabernacle  —  The  eleven 
Curtains  of  the  Tent  —  The    Screen    of    the    Tabernacle  — 
External  coverings 157-192 

Chapter   II 
THE  TABERNACLE  WITHIN  THE  TENT 

The  Walls  of  the  Tabernacle — Holy  Chambers  exact  in  size — The 
Veil  of  the  Sanctuary — The  figured  Curtains — Ventilation  of 
the  Chambers— The  Tent  portable — The  Cui-tains  not  sewn — 
Tent-ropes  and  pegs — Dormitories  of  the  Tent — Gilding  of  the 
Tabernacle 193-213 


At  the  suggestion  of  the  author  the  ar- 
rangement of  the  illustrations  in  this  edition 
was  changed  after  they  were  printed,  princi- 
pally to  bring  together  in  one  place  for  easy 
reference  and  study,  the  four  illustrations 
representing  the  four  stages  in  the  erection 
of  the  Tabernacle. 


CONTENTS. 


XIX 


PART   IV 

THE   TRIPLE   CrBIT  I^  BABYLONIA  AIs^D  11^ 
PALESTI]^E 

PAGK 

Xew  light  on  the  Taheraacle — The  Small  Cubit  as  Span — Testimony 
of  the  Talmud  — The  Stature  of  GoHath  — The  Cubits  of 
Herodotus — The  Birs- JSfimroud — Influence  of  Babylon  in  Asia    215-231 


Index 


232 


LIST   OF   ILLUSTRATIOJ^S 


CONTEXTIONAL     TaBERNACLE  ; 

3,  Tabernacle  of  Text 


2,    Fergusson's   Restoratiox  ; 

.  Frontispiece 


to  face 
to  face 


The  Eamet  Enclosure — Exterior  of  "West  Wall 
Eeconstruction  of  Samitel's  Altar  at  Ramah  . 
Map  of  Sinai  Peninsula  and  Canaan 
The  Ramet  Enclosure — Interior  of  "West  "Wall 
The  Erection  of  the  Tabernacle — First  Stage 
„  ,,  Second  Stage 

„  ,,  Third  Stage 

„  ,,  Fourth  Stage 

The  Scale  of  Gudea 

The  Tabernacle  of  Witness  and  Court  of  the  Tabernacle 
Outline  Plan  of  the  Outer  Court  and  Tabernacle 

The  Eleven  Curtains 

The  Screen  of  the  Tabernacle 

The  Forty-eight  Boards 

The  Inner  Veil   ......... 

The  Ten  Curtains 

Reconstruction  Plan  of  the  Birs-Nimrond 
Geometric  Principle  of  the  Tabernacle  Tent 


IX 
XX 


17 
32 
48 
64 
80 
142,  143 
166 
171 
186 
189 
196 
199 
201 
228 
230 


q: 

< 

h 
j 
< 

"J 

UJ 

D 

< 
(/) 

Li. 
O 

Z 

o 

I- 
o 

D 

q: 

h 

z 
o 
o 

UJ 


1 
< 

< 

< 


ag 

^35^" 

h 

q: 

3 

« 

O 

u 

Si> 

hi 

1 

J             £ 

< 

i       &       J 

S 

LJ 

Q. 

a 

0 

j^^^'ttj? 

U  1 

t                             Q 

^ag56^'«pW?]j^9 

Q 

Z' 

■ss    jE^^^^^^^jSai 

t- 

o 

0) 

- 

"• 

i2  H 

^m 

—  ^  o     « 

>           bJ     3 

\'   It'  ,  am 

0-       (0 

to 

1      1  8 

^M 

i^^ 

^^Bm 

^  5 

u  I 

0  i 

uJ  g 


8]    ^D    h 

•  r 

9, 


PAET  I. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  TABERNACLE, 


CHAPTER    I. 
TO  THE  DESTRUCTION  OF  SHILOH. 

THE  Tabernacle  and  its  Tent  were  set  up  on  the  first 
day  of  the  ecclesiastical  year,  and  a  great  passover 
service  held  thereat  on  the  first  anniversary  of  the  E:^odu8. 

A  few  days  were  spent  in  perfecting  its  ceremonial 
organization,  and  on  the  first  day  of  the  second  month  a 
census  of  the  people  was  taken,  and  the  princes  of  the  tribes 
selecte'd.  Preparations  were  then  made  for  journeying. 
Six  covered  wagons,  each  drawn  by  two  oxen,  were 
presented  by  the  princes  on  behalf  of  the  tribes,  and, 
from  the  uses  to  which  these  were  put,  we  gain  a  view 
of  the  relative  sizes  of  the  tabernacle  parts,  and  of  the 
portability  of  the  whole  construction. 

To  the  children  of  Xohath,  the  second  son  of  Levi, 
and  the  grandfather  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  was  relegated 
the  duty  of  carrying,  upon  their  shoulders,  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  the  two  altars  (one  of  brass  and  one  of  gold), 
and  all  the  furniture  and  vessels  of  the  sanctuary.  The 
ark  was  wrapped  in  the  most  sacred  veil,  and  the  screen 
of  the  Tabernacle  was  folded  together  and  carried  free. 
The  removal  of  this  portion  of  the  structure  was  under 
the  direct  care  and  supervision  of  the  High-priest,  and 
did  not  allow  of  the  use  of  any  vehicle. 


4  THE    TABEEISTACLE. 

To  the  GersTionites  fell  the  duty  of  conveying  the 
twenty -one  curtains  of  the  tent  and  the  Tabernacle,  the 
skin  covering  of  the  tent,  and  the  sixty  linen-hangings 
of  the  surrounding  court,  with  their  pegs  and  ropes. 
Besides  these  there  were  two  screens.  One  of  these  was 
the  embroidered  screen  of  the  east  gate.  The  other  is 
that  which  is  described  as  *  the  screen  for  the  door 
of  the  court  which  is  by  the  tabernacle  and  the  altar* 
(Xumbers  iii.  26).^  We  have,  in  these  words,  the  first 
recognition  in  the  text  of  that  north  gate  which  was 
directly  opposite  to  the  brasen  altar.  We  learn  also  that 
it  had  its  own  screen,  which  was  unembroidered  and  of 
white  linen,  and  was  probably  put  in  place  only  when 
the  court  of  the  Tabernacle  was  closed.  It  would  require 
to  have  been  15  feet  in  length  to  have  closed  the 
opening.^  There  would  be  a  centre-post  opposite  the 
line  of  the  Soreg. 

Eleazar,  the  prospective  High-priest,  was  appointed  to 
oversee  this  department  of  the  transport,  and  two  wagons 
were  detailed  for  his  use. 

To  the  Merarites,  as  the  descendants  of  the  youngest 
of  the  sons  of  Levi,  the  heavy  work  of  the  removal  was 
entrusted.  Forty -eight  boards,  each  12'  x  If  X  fV'j  sixty 
wooden  standards,  with  their  metal  sockets,  twelve  pillars 

1  Unless  otherwise  specified,  all  Scripture  references  of  this  volume  are  to 
the  text  of  the  Revised  Version  of  the  English  Bible. 

2  It  was  the  removal  of  this  screen,  which  was  probably  composed  of  two 
curtains,  that  is  referred  to  in  the  words  '  Samuel  opened  the  doors  of 
the  house  of  the  Lord'  (1  Samuel  iii.  15).  This  was  done  at  the  dawning 
of  the  morning,  the  offering  of  the  morning  sacrifice  being  completed  before 
the  risins:  of  the  sun. 


THE    START    FEOM    SINAI.  5 

and  fifteen  side -bars,  together  with  the  two  pieces  of 
the  ridge- bar,  were  their  care.  For  the  transport  of  the 
timber  of  the  Tabernacle,  four  wagons  were  given,  the 
whole  being  under  the  hand  of  Ithainar,  the  younger 
son  of  Aaron. 

1.  All  was  now  materially  arranged  for  a  start  from 
Sinai.  But  one  duty  still  remained  to  be  performed, 
which  was  the  dedication  of  the  brasen  altar  by  anointing 
(Exodus  xxix.  37;  Numbers  vii.  81-88).  Not  until  this 
was  done  was  it  'most  holy,'  and  capable  of  fulfilling  its 
great  function  in  the  economy  of  Jahvism. 

A  week  was  spent  in  the  performance  of  this  ceremony, 
during  which  many  gifts  were  made  for  the  service  of 
the  altar.  These  were  *  spoons'  with  which  to  handle 
the  incense,  *  bowls'  in  which  to  convey  the  sacrificial 
blood  to  the  altar  for  sprinkling,  and  platters  or  trays  on 
which  to  carry  the  sacrificial  joints.  All  these  were 
of  gold  or  silver,  and  remained  to  after-times  as  part  of 
the  utensils  for  the  service  of  the  altar. 

This  week  of  dedication  followed  the  first  solemnisation 
of  the  passover  in  the  wilderness,  and  on  the  twentieth 
day  of  the  second  month  the  guiding  cloud  lifted. 

In  an  instant  all  was  activity !  The  Tabernacle  was 
taken  down,  having  stood  for  fifty  days  only.  The 
Grershonites  moved  forward  first,  as  by  the  eleven  curtains 
which  they  carried,  the  new  site  for  the  tent  had  to  be 
marked  out.^     The  Merarites  followed  with  the  standards 

*  For  the  reason  of  this  see  pp.  208  and  230. 


6  THE    TABERNACLE. 

and  boards  and  pillars  to  be  set  up.  Last,  came  the  holy 
vessels,  wbich  on  arrival  were  placed,  by  priestly  hands, 
in  the  already-erected  Sanctuary.  Such,  repeated  again 
and  again,  was  the  order  in  which  the  Tabernacle  moved 
from  place  to  place  during  the  whole  period  of  its  history. 

2.  The  general  direction  taken  by  the  guiding  cloud 
in  removing  from  Sinai  is  indicated  in  the  words  'And 
the  cloud  abode  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran*  (Numbers 
X.  12).  If  by  Paran  we  are  to  understand  'that  great 
and  terrible  wilderness '  which  lay  between  Horeb  and 
Kadesh-Barnea  ^  (Deut.  i.  19),  in  the  heart  of  Arabia, 
now  known  as  Bad  let  et-  Tih,  the  pathless  Wilderness, 
the  direction  of  the  route  taken  by  the  Israelites  will  not 
be  difficult  of  decision. 

In  this  wilderness  the  oasis  of  Zin  (=  lowland,  as 
opposed  to  the  uplands  of  the  Negeb)  was  the  tract  of 
pasture-land  now  known  as  the  Wady  Qadees — the  term 
*  wilderness '  having  reference  to  its  non-occupation  by 
man,  and  not  being  meant  to  describe  its  physical  qualities. 
The  Wady  Qadees  or  Kadis  is  an  irregularly-surfaced  plain, 
several  miles  in  diameter.  In  this  fertile  amphitheatre 
is  the  Ain  Kadis,  one  or  more  never-failing  springs  of 
clear  water,  rising  at  the  foot  of  a  limestone  cliff,  which, 


*  On  Samuel's  death  David  is  said  to  have  gone  dovm  *  to  the  wilderness 
of  Paran.'  Thence  he  sent  to  Carmel  and  Maon  to  Nabal,  having  heard 
that  he  was  shearing  his  sheep.  These  places  are  about  68  miles  north  of 
Ain  Kadis  (1  Samuel  xxv.  1).  As  all  journeys  were  performed  afoot,  it  is 
impossible  to  limit  the  northern  extension  of  the  term  '  wilderness  of  Paran  ' 
to  any  distance  from  Carmel  greater  than  this  would  allow  of.  The  more  so 
as  David  claimed  to  have  protected  ISTabal's  property. 


riEST    AREIYAL    AT    KADESH.  7 

flowing  down  the  valley,  spread  fertility  on  either  hand. 
Before  being  lost  in  the  sand,  a  few  hundred  yards  away, 
they  fill  two  stone  wells  or  basins  built  up  from  the 
bottom  with  limestone  blocks.  Around  lie  stone  troughs 
for  watering  stock. 

The  principal  event  of  the  first  stay  at  Kadesh,  now 
Kadis  J  was  the  sending  of  the  spies  in  advance  to  search 
out  the  land  (Numbers  xiii.).  It  is  noteworthy  that  they 
traversed  the  land,  probably  in  companies  of  two  or  three, 
as  far  as  the  pass  oiSunin  in  the  latitude  of  Tyre,  beginning 
from  the  point  at  which  the  camp  lay  in  the  oasis  of  Zin. 
This  rich  valley  was  provisionally  included  in  the  national 
territor}^,  the  frontier  of  which  ran  to  its  immediate 
south  (Numbers  xxxiv.  4),  and  was  allotted  to  the  tribe 
of  Judah  (Joshua  xv.  3). 

These  facts  will  prepare  us  for  the  reception  of  a  little 
recognised  aspect  of  the  forty  years'  wanderings,  which 
is,  that  with  the  exception  of  a  short  time  spent  in 
travel  across  the  Arabah,  thirty-eight  years  were  spent 
at  the  central  station  of  Kadesh-Barnea.  The  evidence 
on  this  behalf  is  purely  textual  and  is  convincingly 
clear.  The  record  is  as  follows  : — On  leaving  Hazeroth 
the  congregation  pitched  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran 
(Numbers  xii.  16).  The  itinerary  gives  seventeen 
marches — each  probably  the  effort  of  a  single  day  ^  — 
from   Sinai,  through  the   wilderness   of  Paran,  the  last 


1  Thus  Hazeroth  is  described  as  a  three  days'  journey  from  Sinai  (Numbers 
X.  33).  The  encampments  were  at  Taberah  (Numbers  xi.  3),  Kibroth- 
hattaavah,  and  Hazeroth  (Numbers  xi.  34-35).  Fourteen  names  follow 
Hazeroth  in  Numbers  xxxiii. 


8  THE    TABEENACLE. 

being  to  Bene-jaakan  (Numbers  xxxiii.  16-31).  There 
is  more  than  a  suspicion  that  this  place  was  that  after- 
wards named  Kadesh  ( =  the  Holy),  from  the  long 
stay  of  the  Tabernacle  there.  Originally  the  home  of 
the  children  of  Jaakan,  the  descendants  of  Seir,  the 
Horite  (Genesis  xiv.  6  and  xxxvi.  27 ;  1  Chronicles  i.  42), 
who  may  have  built  the  limestone  basins  to  conserve 
the  water  of  the  springs,  it  became  known,  later,  as 
the  Wells  of  the  Children  of  Jaakan  (Deut.  x.  6). 
This  was  the  place  to  which  the  children  of  Israel 
came  when  they  encamped  on  the  other  side  of  the 
wilderness  of  Paran,  at  Kadesh  (Numbers  xiii.  26). 
It  is  a  faint  reminiscence  of  those  far-off  days  of  the 
troglodyte  inhabitants  of  the  oasis  of  Zin,  that  the 
name  of  the  neighbouring  station  of  Hor-haggidgad, 
=  the  cavern  of  Gidgad  (Numbers  xxxiii.  32),  has 
prefixed  to  it  the  Horite  name.  This  is  the  Mount 
Hor  on  which  Aaron  died  (Numbers  xx.  23),  and 
which  is  stated  to  be  situated  *  by  the  border  of 
Edom,'  thus  showing  its  proximity  to  Kadesh,^  of 
which  the  same  is  predicated  in  the  16th  verse  of 
the  same  chapter.  To  this  subject  we  must  return  on 
a  later  page,  as  it  is  the  hinge  on  which  the  whole 
question  of  the  later  stages  of  the  Exodus  route  turns. 

^  1.  The  biblical  indications  as  to  the  situation  of  Kadesh  are  these : — 

(1)  It  was  eleven  days  ordinary  caravan  journey  from  Horeb  when 
travelling  the  Edom  road  (Deut.  i.  2).  A  caravan  travels  from  fifteen  to 
eighteen  miles  per  diem.  The  direct  distance  from  Sinai  to  Am  Kadis  is 
one  hundred  and  fifty  miles.  In  the  itineraries  of  Numbers  seventeen 
marches  are  given  by  name,  showing  that  those  taken  by  the  host  were 
shorter  than  was  usual.     This  is  what  we  might  anticipate. 

(2)  Kadesh  is  described  as  '  a  city '  on  the  edge  of  the  boundary  of  Edom 


SINAI    PENINSULA 

ANI  D 

CANAAN 

ILLUSTRATING  TME   F-XODUS  FROM  SINAI 

ROOTE   Op   EXODUS    »- 


M^DITEPIRANFAN 


FIEST    DEPAETUEE    FEOM    KADESH.       9 

3.  As  has  been  stated,  the  first  year  of  the  wanderings 
was  spent  in  travelling  to  Sinai  and  in  a  prolonged  stay- 
there.  Sinai  was  left  on  the  twentieth  day  of  the  second 
month  of  the  second  year  of  the  Exodus  (Numbers  x.  11). 
The  actual  days  of  travel  to  Kadesh  were  seventeen,  but 
there  were  delays,  as  at  Hazeroth,  where  they  *  abode  * 
and  rested  (Numbers  xi.  35).  It  is  thus  impossible  to  fix 
the  time  of  the  arrival  at  the  wells  of  the  Beni-Jaakan, 
but  the  stay  there  was  sufficiently  long  to  allow  of  the 
forty  days'  absence  of  the  twelve  spies. 

On  the  morrow  after  their  defeat  by  the  Amorites  at 
the  place  afterwards  called  Hormah  (Numbers  xiv.  25, 
and  Deut.  i.  44),  the  congregation  was  bidden  to  leave 


(Numbers  xx.  16  and  xxxiv.  3).  It  was  then  occupied  by  the  Hebrew 
host,  as  an  enclosed  place,  or  '  Ir,'  and  was  otherwise  unclaimed.  The 
calling  of  it  '  a  city '  is  an  undesigned  proof  of  its  long-continued  occupation 
by  the  Hebrew  host. 

(3)  The  well  Beer-lahai-roi  is  described  as  being  between  Kadesh  and 
Bered  (Genesis  xvi.  14).  As  Bered  is  identified  with  Ealamhy  thirteen 
miles  south  of  Beersheba,  the  geographical  conditions  suit  Ain  Kadis. 

(4)  It  lay  to  the  south  of  Arad,  now  Tell  Arad  (Numbers  xiv.  45  and 
xxi.  1-3).     Ain  Kadis  is  almost  due  south  of  Tell  Arad. 

(5)  It  was  near  the  hiU  country  of  the  Amorites  (Deut.  i.  20).  The 
Amorites  are  described  as  living  in  the  '  mountain '  or  elevation  on  which 
Arad  was  situate  (Deut.  i.  44). 

II.  The  following  is  a  list  of  the  Scripture  designations  of  the  place  after- 
wards kno^n  as  Kadesh  : — 

(1)  En-Mishpat,  the  same  is  Kadesh  (  =  the  spring  of  judgment, 
Genesis  xiv.  7) . 

(2)  Bene-Jaakan  (  =  the  children  of  Jaakan,  1  Chron.  i,  42  ;  Numbers 
xxxiii.  31). 

(3)  Beeroth-bene-Jaakan  (=the  wells  of  the  sons  of  Jaakan,  Deut.  x.  6). 

(4)  Meribah-of-Kadesh,  in  the  wilderness  of  Zin  (Numbers  xxvii.  14 ; 
Deut.  xxxii.  51). 

(5)  The  wilderness  of  Zin,  the  same  is  Kadesh  (Numbers  xxxiii.  36). 

(6)  The  waters  of  Meriboth- Kadesh  (Ezekiel  xlvii.  19  and  xlviii.  28). 

(7)  '  Kadesh- Barnea  '  has  ten  occurrences  in  the  Hexateuch. 

(8)  '  Meribah '  has  five  occurrences  in  the  Pentateuch  and  Psalms. 


10  THE    TABERISTACLE. 

Kadesli,  and  take  their  journey  into  the  Wilderness  of 
the  Red  Sea.  This  the  humiliated  people  did,  and  they 
reached  Ezion-Geber,  which,  as  the  crow  flies,  is  seventy- 
five  miles  south  of  Kadesh. 

Of  that  journey  of  disgrace  and  punishment  not 
a  single  incident  is  recorded.  Of  the  stations  at  which 
they  must  have  encamped,  three  only  are  named,  if  we 
exclude  the  two  termini  (Numbers  xxxiii.  82-36).  The 
return  journey  is  described  in  a  single  sentence :  '  They 
journeyed  from  Ezion-Geber  and  pitched  in  the  wilderness 
of  Zin,  the  same  is  Kadesh.' 

It  is  appropriate  that  an  expedition  which  was 
altogether  punitive  should  find  mention  in  the  historical 
records  of  that  time,  and  nothing  more.  Beyond  the 
fact  of  removing  them  from  further  attack  by  the  Amorites 
it  had  no  apparent  object,  except  a  moral  one. 

Eight  or  ten  months  would  seem  to  have  been  spent 
on  this  expedition.  This  period  is  arrived  at  by  the 
statement  that  they  went  over  the  brook  Zered  on  the 
anniversary  of  their  first  departure  from  Kadesh 
(Deut.  ii.  14). 

If  there  are  no  exact  data  to  give  us  the  time  of  their 
first  departure  from  Kadesh,  we  know  to  a  few  days  the 
date  of  their  return.  *  They  came  into  the  wilderness 
of  Zin  (to  abide  there)  in  the  first  month  '  (Numbers 
XX.  1).  That  this  was  the  first  month  of  the  third  year 
of  their  wanderings  hardly  admits  of  doubt  to  an  unbiassed 
mind.  It  is  probable  that  they  arrived  at  Xadesh  in 
time  to  keep  the  Passover  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  that 
month,  but  no  mention  is   made   of   the   fact.     As   the 


SECOND    ARRIVAL    AT    KADESH.  11 

ordinary  sacrifices  were  not  offered  during  the  years  in 
the  wilderness  (Amos  ii.  10 ;  v.  25),  it  is  possible  the 
seasons  were  merely  observed  without  them.  This 
provisional  state  of  things,  as  regards  sacrifices,  is 
referred  to  by  Moses  in  Deut.  xii.  5-9. 

It  thus  transpires  that  two  whole  years  were  spent  by 
the  fugitives  from  Egypt  in  wandering  from  place  to 
place.  These  were  the  first  two  of  the  forty.  It  is  to 
these  years  that  the  Psalmist  refers : 

*  They  wandered  in  the  wilderness  in  a  desert  way ; 

They  found  no  city  of  habitation. 

Hungry  and  thirsty, 

Their  soul  fainted  in  them. 

Then  they  cried  unto  the  Lord  in  their  trouble, 

And  He  delivered  them  out  of  their  distresses. 

He  led  them  also  by  a  straight  way, 

That  they  might  go  to  a  city  of  habitation ' ; 

(Psalm  cvii.  4-7)  : 

that  *  city  '  being  the  enclosed  camp  at  Kadesh 
(Numbers  xx.  16). 

4.  Having  arrived  at  Kadesh  for  the  second  time,  the 
congregation  and  the  Tabernacle  did  not  again  remove 
until  thirty- seven  years  had  passed.^  Aaron's  death 
took  place  at  the  first  station  after  their  final  departure, 
and  it  occurred  on  the  first  day  of  the  fifth  month 
of  the  fortieth  year  of  their  exile  (Numbers  xxxiii.  38). 

1  The  sentence  pronounced  upon  tliem  for  their  unbelief  was  not  that  they 
should  be  '  wanderers  forty  years,'  but  that  they  should  be  '  shepherds  in  the 
wilderness  '  for  that  time  (Numbers  xiv.  33,  margin). 


12  THE    TABEENACLE. 

This  was  the  fifth  lunar  month  after  the  Spring 
equinox,  and  corresponds  with  the  end  of  July  or 
beginning  of  August.  In  March  or  April  thirty-seven 
years  before,  the  congregation  had  arrived  there  from 
Ezion-Geber. 

Of  these  thirty -seven  years,  the  'many  days'  of 
Deut.  ii.  1,  few  or  no  incidents  are  recorded.  The 
adult  males  of  the  nation  were  under  sentence  of 
death,  and  during  these  years  the  merciful  punishment 
fell  gradually  and  almost  insensibly. 

One  incident  of  ingratitude  and  rebellion,  which  had 
far-reaching  consequences,  is  recorded.  It  is  the  only 
incident  so  recorded,  and  this,  not  because  it  was 
intended  to  give  any  particulars  of  the  history  of  the 
people,  but  because  it  became  the  reason  for  the  exclusion 
of  Aaron  and  Moses  from  the  promised  land.  That 
event  was,  of  course,  the  murmuring  of  the  people 
because  there  was  no  water,  or  not  enough  water 
(Numbers  xx.  2-13).  This  solitary  incident  of  the  thirty- 
seven  years  at  Kadesh  has  suffered  misapprehension  in 
two  directions.  One,  by  confounding  it  with  a  similar 
outbreak  at  Rephidim  soon  after  the  departure  from 
Sinai  (Exodus  xvii.  1-7).  But  the  two  outbreaks 
are  clearly  distinguished  in  the  blessing  of  Moses — the 
former  being  called  Massah  (=  proving),  and  the  latter 
Meribah^  (=  strife),  (Deut.  xxxiii.  8).  The  other  mistake 
is  that  of  supposing  that  the  water  from  the  smitten 
rock  *  followed'  the  wandering  tribesmen  in  their  long 

^  This  name  was,  at  the  first,   applied  to  the  sin  at  Eephidim  (Exodus 
XTii.  7),  but  was  afterwards  reserved  to  Kadesh. 


SECOND    DEPARTURE    FROM    KADESH.    13 

pilgrimage.  This  idea  is  based  upon  a  superficial  view 
of  Paul's  words — *  They  drank  of  a  spiritual  Rock  that 
followed  them  *  (1  Corinthians  x.  4).  As  now  explained, 
the  thirty -seven  years  stay  of  the  Tabernacle  at  Kadesh 
renders  such  false  exegesis  impossible  —  the  increased 
flow  of  water  continuing  for  that  time,  and  following 
its  own  law  of  gravitation.  The  limestone  rock  at 
Ai'n  Kadis  became  a  type  of  Christ,  and  the  source  and 
constancy/  of  its  increased  flow  the  point  of  the  Apostle's 
argument  with  regard  to  it. 

5.  As  Aaron  died  immediately  after  the  departure 
from  Kadesh-Barnea  on  the  first  day  of  the  fifth  month 
of  the  fortieth  year  of  exile,  it  is  evident  that  but  eight 
months  elapsed  between  that  event  and  the  crossing  of 
the  Jordan  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  following  year 
(Joshua  iv.  19).  Of  this  period  of  eight  months,  one 
was  spent  on  the  plains  of  Moab  mourning  for  the  death 
of  Moses  (Deut.  xxxiv.  8),  and  another  at  Mount  Hor 
for  the  death  of  Aaron  (Numbers  xx.  29).  The  actual 
time  spent  in  travelling  from  Kadesh,  and  in  the  conquest 
of  Eastern  Palestine,  till  the  arrival  at  Jordan,  could 
not  have  been  more  than  six  months.  As  the  river 
was  crossed  four  days  before  the  holding  of  the  passover 
in  Spring,  these  were  the  months  of  Winter. 

It  was  thus  early  Autumn  when  the  host  finally 
moved  from  the  wells  of  Kadesh  on  its  last  journey. 
The  direction  taken  was  eastward,  with  a  northern 
inclination.  A  single  copyist's  error  in  Numbers  xxi.  4 
has  lead  to   a  prevalent  belief  that  the  promised  land 


14  THE    TABERNACLE. 

was  reached  by  way  of  the  Red  Sea.  We  have  but 
to  read  Salt  Sea  for  *Red'  Sea  in  that  verse,  as  in 
Deut.  iii.  17,  and  the  harmony  of  the  whole  narrative 
is  restored.  The  change  was  possibly  made  to  bring  the 
text  into  accord  with  the  same  phrase  in  Deuteronomy 
(Deut.  ii.  1).  But  in  this  case  the  reference  is  to  the 
fit'st  departure  from  Kadesh,  and  is  historically  right. 
In  the  other  the  reference  is  to  the  second  departure 
from  Kadesh,  when  the  route  lay  across  the  Arabah, 
south  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

There  is  but  one  broad  valley  of  access  that  leads  to 
the  oasis  of  Zin,  so  that  the  Hebrew  host,  both  in  coming 
and  going,  had  to  travel  by  it.  This  valley  runs  from 
the  east,  and  terminates  at  the  foot  of  a  singular  and 
isolated  peak,  which  they  passed  and  re-passed.  It  is 
variously  known  in  the  text  as : 

Moseroth,  Numbers  xxxiii.  30. 
^  Moserah,  Deut.  x.  6. 
Hor-haggidgad,  Numbers  xxxiii.  32. 
Mount  Hor,  Numbers  xxxiii.  38. 

A  comparison  of  these  texts  will  show  that  the  Hebrew 
host  camped  at  the  foot  of  this  mountain  on  their  first 
visit  to  Kadesh,  and  that  they  again  pitched  their  tents 
there  on  their  final  departure  from  Kadesh. 

It  was  at  this  time  that  Aaron  died,  and  to  the  fact  of 
his  burial  there  is  to  be  attributed  its  change  of  name 
to  Mount   Hor,  which  name  is  equivalent  to  the  Mount 

1  *  Moserah  or  Moseroth.  must  be  considered  as  equal  to  Mount  Hor  ' 
(Hastings'  Dictionary,  vol.  i.  p.  806). 


DEATH    OP    AAEOX.  15 

of  Mounts.  Deut.  x.  6  is  definite  in  telling  us  that  at 
Moserah  Aaron  died.^  Within  a  march  of  Ain  Kadis 
stands  this  remarkable  and  isolated  hill,  which  bears  the 
Arabic  name  of  Jebel  Modera/i,  and  which  the  weight  of 
evidence  shows  to  have  been  the  place  of  Aaron's  death 
and  burial.  The  similarity  of  name  to  Moserah  will  not 
escape  notice. 

6.  It  was  during  the  thirty  days  mourning  for  Aaron 
that  the  King  of  Arad,  living  in  the  Negeb,  showed  signs 
of  hostility  to  the  Hebrew  host,  and  captured  some  of  the 
stragglers  from  the  camp.  These  were  probably  herdsmen 
and  shepherds  in  charge  of  grazing  stock. 

The  ruins  of  the  city  Arad  are  still  to  be  seen  on 
a  white-crowned  hill  about  sixteen  miles  south  of  Hebron, 
and  are  known  as  Tell  Arad,  Ain  Kadis  being  about 
eighty  miles  from  Hebron.  The  reason  given  for  the 
oflPensive  action  of  the  king  in  the  ISTegeb  is,  that  he 
heard  Israel  was  moving,  from  their  long  stay  at  Kadesh, 
'by  the  way  of  the  spies'  {marg.  Numbers  xxi.  1). 
Clearer  testimony  than  this  as  to  the  direction  taken  by 
the  host  is  hardly  to  be  desired.     The  consequence  of  his 

1  The  parenthesis  of  Deut.  x.  6  and  7  not  only  breaks  into  Moses' 
narrative  of  events,  but  associates  the  first  departure  of  the  host  from  Kadesh, 
when  it  travelled  to  Ezion-Geber  by  way  of  Jotbathah  (cf.  Numbers  xxxiii. 
33-34),  with  the  second  departure  from  Kadesh,  when  Aaron  died.  If 
verse  8  be  read  in  immediate  succession  to  verse  5,  the  sense  will  be  clear, 
and  the  facts  related  in  them  will  be  seen  in  their  true  perspective.  The 
Eevised  Version's  inclusion  of  verses  8  and  9  within  the  parenthesis  is 
misleading.  Meanwhile  the  present  readiQgs  of  vv.  6-7  cannot  be  defended 
in  their  sequence.  While  both  contain  statements  of  historical  truth,  that  of 
the  latter  verse  is  anterior  to  that  of  the  former. 


16  THE    TABERNACLE. 

action  was  a  national  resolution  to  carry  out  the  ban 
of  Deut.  XX.  16-18,  and  to  save  nothing  alive  that 
breathed,  if  God  gave  victory. 

The  struggle  is  very  briefly  described  (Numbers  xxi. 
1-3).  The  Canaanites  were  delivered  up,  and  the  place 
called  Hormah  (=  devoted).  This  is  not  a  proper  name, 
but  an  appellative,  signifying  the  total  destruction  to 
which  every  living  thing  was  doomed  within  the  town 
or  district  so  described.  We  have  a  similar  use  of  the 
word  in  the  case  of  Zephath,  a  town  destroyed  by  Judah 
after  the  death  of  Joshua  (Judges  i.  17).^  The  fury  with 
which  Arad  was  treated,  as  a  place  beyond  the  bounds 
of  humanity  and  mercy,  was  a  blow  of  sufficient  severity 
to  prevent  further  molestation,  and  the  way  to  the  Arabah 
lay  open.  It  was,  of  course,  the  place  of  their  defeat 
thirty-eight  years  before  (Numb.  xiv.  45  ;  Deut.  i.  44,  45). 

It  was  also  during  the  stay  at  Mount  Hor  that 
messengers  were  sent  to  Petra,  the  capital  of  Edom,  to 
request  permission  for  the  Hebrew  host  to  pass  through 
their  territory. 

Thirty-eight  years  before,  similar  permission  had  been 
asked  for  and  had  been  refused  (Numbers  xx.  14-21). 
The  terms  offered  now  were  the  same  as  then,  that  the 
travellers  were  to  go  upon  the  highway,  and  to  pay  for 
anything  consumed  by  themselves  or  by  their  stock. 

1  By  tlie  time  of  David  one  of  the  two  places  was  known  by  the  name  of 
Hormah,  which  had  then  superseded  the  Canaanite  name  (1  Samuel  xxx,  30). 
Zephath  is  probably  meant,  as  its  name  was  officially  changed  to  Hormah 
(Judges  i.  17),  and  as  such  it  was  apportioned  to  the  division  of  Simeon 
(Joshua  xix.  4).  Zephath,  now  Sebaitd,  is  about  25  miles  in  a  N.N.E. 
direction  from  Ain  Kadis. 


THE  EDOMITE  ROUTE  TAKEN.     17 

During  these  5^ears  many  changes  had  taken  place,  and 
amongst  others  this,  that  a  sense  of  the  miraculous 
preservation  and  defence  of  the  Hebrew  host  had  penetrated 
the  mind  of  the  Edomite  king  and  people.  The  consent 
now  asked  for  was  granted,  being  based  upon  the  results 
which  a  refusal  would  have  entailed.  The  congregation, 
therefore,  prepared  to  leave  Mount  Hor  and  to  enter  the 
Edomite  territory,  a  special  order  of  care  and  warning 
being  issued  by  Moses  in  anticipation  of  the  march 
(Deut.  ii.  2-8).  This  order  contains  two  indications  of 
the  direction  to  be  taken.  One  is  in  the  words  *Tura 
you  northward '  ;  the  other  is  a  statement  of  the  fact 
that,  having  passed  through  the  Edomite  territory,  they 
travelled  by  the  great  road  which,  even  then,  ran 
northward  from  Ezion-Geber  in  the  direction  of  Damascus. 

The  fact  of  this  concession  from  the  children  of  Esau 
in  Seir,  having  been  so  generally  overlooked  by  writers 
dealing  with  this  period  of  Hebrew  history,  is  one  which 
is  the  more  remarkable  as  it  is  twice  referred  to,  as 
a  fact,  in  the  second  chapter  of  Deuteronomy.  In  verse  4 
we  have  it  spoken  of  in  anticipation,  and  in  verse  29 
in  retrospect.  From  the  latter  reference  we  learn^^^at 
Moab   acted   in  a   somewhat   similar  way,^   and   that  it 


'  The  action  of  Moab  is  to  be  differentiated  from  that  of  Edom  by  the 
statement  of  Deut.  xxiii.  4,  that  when  the  host  came  from  Eg}-pt  they 
did  not  meet  it  with  gifts  of  bread  and  with  water  in  the  way.  The  route 
travelled  was  not  that  of  the  great  highway  through  Kir-of-Moab  and  Dibon, 
but  they  are  described  as  pitching  on  the  other  side  of  Arnon,  which  is  in  the 
wilderness  (Xumbers  xxi.  23).  Their  stations  are  given  as  Beer,  Mattanah, 
Kahaliel,  and  Bamoth.  They  thus  kept  away  from  Moab  towards  the  east, 
and  obeyed  the  injunction  not  to  meddle  with  Moab.     By  this  route  they 


18  THE    TABERNACLE. 

was  not  until  the  river  Arnon  was  reached  that  fighting 
became  necessary. 

7.  The  conclusion  thus  plainly  stated  as  to  the 
direction  of  the  Exodus  taken  after  leaving  Kadesh 
Barnea  is  borne  out  by  the  particulars  of  the  case,  if 
the  stations  at  which  the  Hebrews  camped  be  examined. 
The  earlier  of  these  need  only  occupy  our  attention,  as 
the  distance  across  Seir,  between  Jehel  Moderah  and  the 
Wady  Hessi  (  =  the  brook  Zered),  is  not  more  than  sixty 
miles,  and  four  intermediate  names  only  are  given.  Each 
of  them  represents  a  day's  march,  of  about  twelve  miles. 

First  Stage. 

Kadesh  Barnea  to  Mount  Hor. 

Second  Stage. 

On  leaving  Mount  Hor,  the  '  king's  way  *  of 
l^umbers  xx.  17  ^  would  lead  them  at  once  to  the 
descent  into  the  valley  or  Ghor  of  Akabah.  The 
watershed  of  the  Akabah  lies  about  midway  between 
the  two  seas,  and  is  rather  more  than  2,000  feet 
above  the  level  of  the  Dead  Sea.  It  is  evident 
that    any   king's  way  passing    from    east   to   west 


found  the  rivers  shallower  and  more  easy  of  passage.  After  the  passage 
of  the  Amon  they  turned  westward,  and  this  brought  them  into  conflict  with 
the  Amorites.  In  his  endeavour  to  avoid  this,  Moses  offered  the  King  of 
Heshbon  to  buy  food  and  water  for  money,  as  he  had  done  from  Edom 
and  from  Moab.  This  was  refused.  Till  this  time  there  were  both  sales 
and  gifts. 

*  This  will  have  been  the  old  Babylonian  highway,  Gen.  xiv.  6,  7. 


EAPtLY    STAGES.  19 

would  go  as  nearl}^  as  possible  over  the  saddle  of 
the  Akabah.  As,  liowever,  no  water  is  to  be  found 
there,  it  would  deflect  a  little  either  to  south  or 
north,  80  as  to  secure  for  travellers  this  necessary 
element.  To  the  north  of  the  watershed  flows 
a  perennial  stream,  named  El-Jeib,  in  a  valley 
which  widens  out  from  a  width  of  half-a-mile  to 
a  breadth  of  ten  miles.  Twenty-four  miles  south 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  at  the  level  of  the  Medi- 
terranean (1,292  feet  above  the  Dead  Sea),  are  some 
remarkable  lacustrine  terraces  of  marl,  sand,  and 
gravel,  with  abundant  water  flowing  below  them, 
lined  with  thickets  of  palm,  tamarisk,  willow,  and 
reeds. 

As  the  first  station  at  which  the  host  encamped 
was  named  Zalmonah  (  =  terraces  or  shady  places), 
it  is  possible  that  it  was  on  these,  or  similar  terraces 
further  west,  that  the  camp  w^as  pitched.  The 
name  itself  is  evidence  that  the  Tabernacle  and  its 
attendants  were  travelling  a  road  which  lay  in 
terraces  one  above  another. 

Third  Stage. 

The  next  station  was  named  Punon  ( =  ore-pits), 
and  is  to  be  sought  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Ghor,  and  north  of  the  city  of  Petra  (Numbers 
xxiv.  19). 

In  the  required  position,  east-of-south  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  is  a  site  named  P/ianon,  where  were 
copper -mines  mentioned  by  Eusebius  and  Jerome. 


20  THE    TABEENACLE. 

They  lie  in  'parched  places  in  the  wilderness,  a  salt 
land  and  not  inhabited '  (Jeremiah  xvii.  6). 

Hence  we  read  that  the  soul  of  the  people  was 
much  discouraged  because  of  the  way  (Numbers 
xxi.  4),  for  there  was  neither  bread  nor  water.  As 
from  this  station  they  are  said  to  have  pitched  in 
Oboth,  it  was  appropriately  here  that  the  brasen 
serpent  was  made  and  uplifted  (compare  Numbers 
xxi.  10  and  xxxiii.  43).  The  tract  they  followed 
was  naturallj^  one  of  ascent  from  the  valley  of  the 
Ghor,  which  made  the  want  of  water  the  more  felt. 
It  does  not  appear  that  their  sufferings  from  thirst 
were  in  any  way  mitigated. 

Fourth  Stage. 

The  king's  way,  in  which  Moses  promised  to 
travel,  was  almost  certainly  one  which  led  from  the 
west  to  the  site  of  the  capital,  afterwards  Petra.  It 
was  one  which  the  advancing  host,  on  its  way  to 
the  ford  of  the  Zered,  would  have  to  abandon  after 
crossing  the  Ghor.  The  want  of  a  beaten  track  would 
greatly  increase  the  difficulties  of  travel,  as  well  as 
take  them  through  a  waterless  country.  We  find 
accordingly,  that  the  next  place  of  encampment  was 
one  which  had  no  recognised  name.  There  was  again 
no  water  for  the  famished  herds,  and  the  thousands 
of  travellers  were  wholly  dependent  on  their  water- 
skins.  Little  wonder  that  they  called  this  place 
Oboth  (  =  water  -  skins),  and  that  it  remained 
a  memory  of  great  sufferings  endured  both  by  man 
and  beast. 


PASSAGE   OF    THE    JORDAN.  21 

Fifth  Stage. 

The  fourth  intermediate  station,  which  took  them 
to  what  is  now  the  great  Haj  road,  was  variously 
named  lye-abarim  (=  the  passages  of  the  Hebrews) 
and  Izim  (Numbers  xxi.  IJ  and  xxxiii.  45).  It  lay 
a  march  south  of  the  Wady  Hessi,  which  by  its  name 
Zered  is  known  to  have  been  the  boundary  between 
Edom  and  Moab.  A  village,  Ime,  may  still  be  found 
on  the  main  road  a  few  miles  south  of  Zered.  Here, 
doubtless,  the  overjoyed  host  saw  the  end  of  their 
sufferings,  as  they  were  now  again  in  the  track  of 
caravans,  and  would  go  from  water  to  water.  We 
do  not  hear  of  any  further  hardships  from  this  source. 

Siccth  Stage. 

This  was  from  the  Passages  of  the  Hebrews  to  the 
tributaries  of  the  brook  Zered,  and  the  remainder 
of  their  journey  to  the  plains  of  Moab  is  too  well 
known  to  require  recapitulation. 

8.  During  all  the  travel  in  the  wilderness  and  across 
the  Arabah,  south  of  the  Dead  Sea,  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant  had  preceded  the  hosts  of  the  Lord  (Numbers  x. 
33) ;  and  not  until  it  came  to  the  banks  of  the  Jordan  was 
the  order  given  that  a  space  of  1,000  yards,  or  2,000  cubits, 
was  to  intervene  between  the  priests  who  bore  it  and  the 
crowds  of  men,  women,  and  children  who  followed. 

The  crossing  took  place  on  the  10th  day  of  Nisan  or 
Abib  (=  April),  and  four  days  afterwards  the  passover 
of  the  fortieth  year  was  held  (Joshua  iv.  10,  14).     The 


22  THE    TABERNACLE. 

parenthesis  of  Joshua  iii.  15  is  thus  to  be  understood  in 
the  sense  of  the  waters  being  low  at  the  time  of  crossing, 
as  it  was  only  in  Summer,  when  the  snows  of  Hermon 
were  melting,  that  its  banks  overflowed. 

Having  crossed  the  Jordan,  the  host  under  Joshua 
found  itself  in  a  new,  unknown,  and  hostile  land,  with  no 
cloud  of  light  to  guide  it. 

The  first  consideration  was  to  find  a  place  on  which  to 
pitch  the  sacred  tent — a  place  which  was  undefiled  by 
death,  for  *  whosoever  in  the  open  field  toucheth  one  that 
is  slain  with  a  sword,  or  a  dead  body,  or  a  bone  of  a  man, 
or  a  grave,  shall  be  unclean'  (Numbers  xix.  16).  It  was 
therefore  necessary  to  alight  upon  some  spot  which  should 
have  been  uninhabited  of  man,  and  of  which  the  soil 
should  have  been  undisturbed.  Such  a  spot  was  found 
4J  miles  west  of  the  Jordan,  and  1-^  miles  east  of  Jericho 
(=  Tell  Jiljulieh).  Here  the  twelve  stones,  brought  from 
the  bed  of  the  Jordan,  were  erected,  not  in  a  megalithic 
circle  of  a  few  yards  in  diameter,  but  as  twelve  boundary- 
stones  marking  out  the  circle  (=  the  Gilgal),  of  which 
the  camp  was  to  consist.  Within  these  limits  was  the 
'clean  place*  (Lev.  x.  14),  within  which  the  sacrifices 
might  be  eaten. ^  On  the  site  described  as  Jiljulieh  are 
still  some  twent3^-five  mounds  scattered  irregularly  over 
an  area  one-third  of  a  mile  wide. 

Here,  then,  the  Tabernacle  was  erected,  and  here  it 
remained  till  the  land  had  rest  from  war  (Joshua  xi.  23). 

^  '  In  the  East,  at  the  present  time,  a  sanctity  is  attached  to  the  spot  from 
which  any  holy  place  is  visible.'  Quoted  by  the  late  George  Grove,  in 
Smith's  Dictionary,  vol.  ii.  p.  388,  n.  A. 


THE    TABERNACLE    AT    GILGAL.  23 

This  was  a  period  of  at  least  seven  years  from  the  first 
occupation  of  Gilgal,  as  we  know  from  the  plea  of  Caleb 
the  son  of  Jephunneh,  who  was  40  years  old  at  the  spying 
of  the  land  and  85  at  the  time  of  his  request,  38  of  the 
intervening  45  years  having  been  spent  in  the  wilderness 
(Joshua  xiv.  7-10).  But  Gilgal,  as  a  once  sacred  spot, 
did  not  lose  its  sanctity  while  the  kingdoms  of  Israel 
lasted,  as  is  shown  in  the  prophecies  of  Hosea  and  Amos. 

9.  The  site  of  Gilgal  was  within  the  territory  allotted 
to  Benjamin,  but  it  is  not  named  as  one  of  its  cities, 
for  the  reason  already  given  of  its  having  been 
uninhabited.  "While  the  camp  stood  at  Gilgal  the  all- 
important  question  arose  as  to  the  choosing  of  a  site 
for  the  permanent  location  of  the  Tabernacle.  No  more 
deeply  engrossing  matter  could  have  been  debated,  as 
any  new  site  would  necessarily  become  the  spiritual 
capital  of  the  twelve  tribes.  Unless  counselled  by  the 
Urira  and  Thummim  (Deut.  xxxiii.  8),  we  may  be  sure 
there  were  those  who  advocated  its  retention  at  Gilgal. 
And  when,  possibly  by  divine  appointment,  a  change 
was  decided  upon,  the  mutual  jealousy  of  the  tribes  had 
to  be  met  and  overcome.  The  tribe  of  Ephraim  had 
already  shown  signs  of  that  autocratic  spirit  (Joshua  xvii. 
14-18)  which  ultimately  led  to  the  disruption  of  the 
Kingdom.  As  the  heirs  of  Joseph's  birthright,  they 
claimed,  from  the  first,  pre-eminence  in  Israel,  and  to 
their  territory  it  was  determined  to  remove  the  tent. 

This  decision  was  based  ou  military  considerations  as 
well  as  on  ecclesiastical  and  civil  ones.     Seven  years   of 


24  THE    TABERNACLE. 

constant  war  had  shown  the  Hebrews  that  their  most 
formidable  foes  were  the  Philistines  of  the  sea-coast. 
These  remained  unsubdued,  and  it  was  thought  advisable 
to  place  the  sanctuary  of  God  on  the  eastern  side  of 
the  terrain,  and  amid  its  largest  and  one  of  its  most 
warlike  tribes.  Not  only  was  this  done,  but  the 
aristocratic  Kohathites  had  their  ten  cities  in  the 
contiguous  tribes  of  Ephraim,  West  Manasseh,  and  Dan. 
The  Kohathites,  like  the  other  Levites,  were  enrolled  for 
war  at  twenty  years  of  age. 

Further,  the  choice  of  a  site  was  influenced  by  the 
fact  that  every  adult  male  was  required  to  attend  the 
Tabernacle  service  at  each  of  the  three  annual  festivals. 
These  included  the  two  and  a  half  tribes  beyond  the 
Jordan.  If  a  glance  at  a  map  of  the  tribes  be  taken 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  site  of  Shiloh  is  about  midway 
between  Dan  and  Beersheba,  and  midway  between 
Mount  Gilead  and  Joppa. 

The  situation  was  not  ill-chosen  for  the  purposes  of 
a  contemplative  faith,  as  well  as  for  security  in  time  of 
strife.  No  building  had  by  any  possibility  brought 
death  and  desecration  to  the  spot.  Like  Gilgal,  it  was 
virgin  soil,  as  the  choice  of  a  name,  taken  from  the 
blessing  of  Jacob,  showed.  The  situation  selected  for 
the  house  of  God  is  minutely  given  (Judges  xxi.  19). 
It  was  north  of  Bethel  (twelve  miles),  south-east  of 
Lebonah  {=Liibban,  three  miles),  and  four  miles  to  the 
east  of  the  great  highway  which  then  ran,  and  still 
runs,  from  Bethel  to  Shechem. 

The  distance  of  Shiloh  from  Gilgal  is  less  than  twenty 


REMOVED    TO    SHILOH.  25 

miles,  and  over  these  miles  the  Tabernacle  and  all  its 
furniture  was  removed  during  the  lifetime  of  Joshua. 
The  now  deserted  site  of  Seilun  not  impossibly  presents 
much  the  same  appearance  as  it  did  then.  There  are 
a  few  ruins  and  some  reek-hewn  sepulchres.  The  last 
lie  outside  the  Taanath-Shiloh  (=  the  circle  of  Shiloh, 
Joshua  xvi.  6),  which  corresponded  to  the  circle  of  Gilgal, 
and  was  formed  by  a  complete  circle  of  hills  which 
surrounds  the  soft  eminence  where  once  stood  the 
Tabernacle.  Stanley  characterizes  the  landscape  as 
*  featureless/  and  as  being  neither  beautiful  nor  grand. 
So  be  it.  Its  glory  was  other  than  of  earth.  Through 
the  two  passages  in  the  hills  around,  the  thousands  of 
Israel  poured,  amid  scenes  of  joyousness  and  gaiety,  for 
two  or  three  centuries  (Judges  xi.  26).  One  of  these 
rocky  gates  leads  to  the  plain  on  the  south,  and  to  the 
great  highway  ;  the  other,  in  the  east,  to  the  fountain, 
where  the  daughters  of  Shiloh  gathered,  then,  as  now,  to 
draw  water.  Robinson  pronounces  this  water  to  be  of 
excellent  quality.  Like  all  other  springs  in  the  Holy 
Land,  its  volume  has  much  decreased,  owing  to  the 
deforesting  of  the  country,  though  it  is  still  abundant. 
Being  a  new  creation,  Shiloh  was  neither  a  priestly  nor 
a  levitical  city,  and  is  not  named  as  one  of  the  towns  of 
Ephraim,  though  the  southern  border  of  the  country  of 
Ephraim  ran  south  of  the  circle  of  hills  in  which  the 
basin  of  Shiloh  stood.  No  events  of  striking  national 
importance  took  place  there  while  the  Tabernacle  stood. 
It  was  not  intended  that  they  should  do  so.  It  was 
thought  enough  that  the  sacrifices  were  offered  and  the 


26  THE    TABERNACLE. 

ritual  of  the  Law  observed.     The  fervour  of  earlier^  years, 

*  When  thou  wentest  after  me  in  the  wilderness/  was 
lost,  and  there  must  have  been  some  great  ecclesiastical 
convulsion  by  which  the  High-priesthood  was  transferred 
from  the  elder  branch  of  the  house  of  Aaron  to  the 
younger.  Of  this  the  history  says  nothing.  It  records, 
in  later  books,  the  names  of  certain  High-priests  of  the 
time  of  Joshua  and  the  Judges.  But  these  are  only 
a  selection,  as  between  Phinehas,  the  grandson  of  Aaron, 
and  the  time  of  the  prophet  Samuel,  a  period  of  two 
centuries,  the  chronicler  has  preserved  five  names  only 
(1  Chron.  vi.  4-7,  50-53).  Even  these  are  not  given  in 
the  histories  of  the  time,  and  we  derive  them  from  post- 
Captivity  documents.  A  fact  such  as  this  is  one  of  evil 
omen  for  the  characters  of  the  men  themselves.  The 
Book  of  Judges,  itself  a  record  of  heroes  and  heroic  deeds 
for  God,  contains  the  name  of  no  head  of  the  Tabernacle 
worship,  and  no  reference  to  the  Tabernacle,  if  we  except 
the  rather  scornful  advice  to  the  Benjamites  to  abduct 
two  hundred  daughters  of  Shiloh  at  the  yearly  passover- 
feast  of  the  Lord,  the  two  other  feasts  being  apparently 
neglected.  The  age  was  one  of  disorganization,  when 
every  man  did  that  which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes,  and 
the  power  of  law  was  lost.  There  is  positive  evidence  to 
the  same  efi'ect  in  the  words.    After  the  death  of  Joshua 

*  there  arose  another  generation,  which  knew  not  tbe  Lord, 
nor  yet  the  work  that  He  had  wrought  for  Israel ' 
(Judges  ii.  10). 

The  Tabernacle  dailj^  services  were  doubtless  observed 
after  a  perfunctory  manner,  but  they  would  seem  to  have 


DECAY    OF    FAITH.  27 

had  little  effect  upon  the  people,  either  to  soften  their 
manners  or  to  raise  their  morals.  The  two  gloomy 
appendices  to  the  Book  of  Judges  in  chapters  xvii., 
xviii.,  and  xix.-xxi.  are  intended  to  set  forth  this  aspect 
of  the  nation's  character. 

The  nation  was  in  imminent  danger  of  apostacy  from 
Jehovah.  Sudden  and  unearned  prosperity  had  fallen 
upon  it,  and  they  loved  the  creature  more  than  the 
Creator  —  the  gift  more  than  the  Giver.  For  its 
unfaithfulness  the  priesthood  was  changed,  and  when 
Samuel  appears  upon  the  scene,  as  a  little  lad,  we  fiud 
Eli,  of  the  house  of  Ithamar,  judging  Israel. 

10.  Samuel  was  still  a  young  man,  when  the 
accumulated  wrath  of  offended  Deity  fell,  in  one  heavy 
blow,  upon  both  priest  and  people.  War  with  the 
Philistines  had  broken  out;  an  expression  used  by  the 
conquerors,  *  Be  not  servants  to  the  Hebrews  as  they 
have  been  to  you,'  shows  that  the  war  was  in  the  nature 
of  a  revolt,  and  had  been  preceded  by  some  years  of 
tribute  and  slavery  on  the  part  of  the  Israelites.  The 
oppression  having  become  intolerable,  it  was  determined, 
by  a  combined  effort  of  all  the  tribes,  to  throw  off  the 
Philistine  yoke. 

An  army  of  thirty  thousand  footmen  ^  (1  Samuel  iv.  10) 
assembled  at  a  spot  near  Beth-Shemesh,  afterwards  named 
Ebenezer.  The  Philistines  had  their  camp  in  Aphek. 
This  word  is  not  here  a  proper  name,  as  it  has  the  definite 

^  These  are  the  numbers  of  the  text,  but,  like  others,  are  given  here  as  being 
subject  to  future  con-ection. 


28  THE    TABERNACLE. 

article  prefixed  to  it,  i.e.  the  Aphek  (=the  aqueduct), 
the  watercourse  of  the  Wady  Ghurab^  the  valley  above 
Beth-Shemesh,  being  intended.  At  the  first  engagement 
the  Hebrews  lost  about  4,000  men,  and  the  honours  of  war 
were  with  the  enemy.  A  decisive  battle  now  became 
imminent,  and  it  was  felt  that  nothing  should  be  left 
undone  to  secure  the  nation's  freedom.  At  a  council  of 
war  held  before  the  fight,  the  unprecedented  proposal  was 
made  to  fetch  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  from  Shiloh — 
30  miles  distant.  It  came,  and  with  it  the  two  sons 
of  Eli,  who  were  its  guardians.  The  proximity  of  the 
hostile  camps  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  the  Philistines 
heard  the  shouting  which  welcomed  its  arrival  in  camp. 

The  plain  of  Surdr,  still  beautiful  and  fertile,  was  the 
probable  scene  of  the  previous  engagement  and  of  the 
one  about  to  follow.  The  misplaced  confidence  of 
the  Israelites  is  embodied  in  the  words,  '  It  shall  save 
us  out  of  the  hand  of  our  enemies.'  It  was  no  longer 
Jehovah,  but  the  material  ark  that  was  the  hope  of  the 
tribesmen  and  their  Elders.  So  low  had  fallen  the  faith 
of  Abraham's  sons !  To  this  act  of  national  apostacy 
Eli  must  have  been  an  acquiescent  party.  He  was  the 
High-priest,  and  without  his  permission  the  ark  could  not 
have  been  removed  from  Shiloh. 

In  what  might  be  called  the  Battle  of  Beth-Shemesh 
the  revolt  was  extinguished  in  blood.  The  ark  was 
captured,  Hophni  and  Phinehas  dying  in  its  defence. 
All  organized  resistance  was  broken  down.  Every 
Israelite  fled  to  his  tent,  and  the  country  was  at  the 
mercy  of  the  invaders.     Over  what  followed  the  Hebrew 


FALL    OF    SHILOH.  29 

historians  draw  a  veil  of  silence.  Shiloh  is  not  mentioned, 
except  as  the  place  of  Eli's  death.  Yet  it  is  certain  that 
it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines,  and  long  centuries 
afterwards  the  prophet  Jeremiah  appealed  to  the  voice 
of  history  to  declare  that  this  destruction  was  *  for  the 
wickedness  of  My  people  Israel'  (Jeremiah  vii.  12).  The 
fullest  account  of  the  shame,  disgrace,  and  misery  that 
followed  on  the  sack  of  the  little  city  within  the  limits  of 
Ephraim,  is  contained  in  one  of  the  Psalms  of  Asaph  : — 

'  The  children  of  Ephraim,  carrying  slack  bows  \_Eioald~\, 

Turned  back  in  the  day  of  battle 

They  provoked  Him  to  anger  with  their  high  places, 

And  moved  Him  to  jealousy  with  their  graven  images. 

"When  God  beard  this,  He  was  wroth, 

And  greatly  abhorred  Israel : 

So  that  He  forsook  the  tabernacle  of  Shiloh, 

The  tent  which  He  placed  among  men  ; 

And  delivered  His  strength  into  captivity, 

And  His  glory  into  the  adversary's  hand. 

He  gave  His  people  over  also  unto  the  sword  ; 

And  was  wroth  with  His  inheritance. 

Fire  devoured  their  young  men ; 

And  their  maidens  had  no  marriage-song. 

Their  priests  fell  by  the  sword ; 

And  their  widows  made  no  lamentation.' 

(Psalm  Ixxviii.  9,  58-64.) 

11.  In  the  presence  of  this  patriotic  reticence,  it  is 
impossible  to  say,  from  the  evidence  of  the  contemporary 
records,  whether  the  sacred  tent  fell  into  the  hands  of 


30  THE    TABERNACLE. 

the  Philistines.  It  is  probable  that  it  did  not  do  so, 
but  that  immediately  on  tbe  receipt  of  the  news  that 
caused  Eli's  death  those  who  were  in  charge  of  it, 
hastily  folding  it  together,  moved  it  away.  This  would 
be  done  in  the  absence  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  (its 
most  precious  deposit),  and  by  the  direction  of  Samuel, 
as  the  sole  remaining  authority  in  Shiloh. 

Soon  the  Philistine  hosts  would  be  on  tbe  spot,  and 
the  sack  of  the  town  ensued.  'No  element  of  savage 
atrocity  would  seem  to  have  been  wanting  to  the  occasion. 
Fired  with  fanatical  hatred,  stimulated  by  the  possession 
of  the  ark,  the  conquering  horde  carried  fire  and  sword 
througb  the  little  settlement,  and  razed  Shiloh  to 
a  desolation  from  which  it  has  never  recovered. 

Among  those  who  escaped  were  Samuel  and  Ahitub, 
the  latter  the  youthful  son  of  Phinehas,  and  grandson 
of  Eli  (1  Samuel  xiv.  3).  The  wreck  of  all  the  hopes 
and  associations  which  clustered  around  the  Tabernacle 
placed  Samuel  in  a  position  of  great  responsibility  and 
power.  His  word  had  already  come  to  all  Israel,  and 
in  the  failure  of  the  High-priestly  power,  whatever  of 
law  and  of  guidance  remained  was  held  by  him. 

His  first  act  would  seem  to  have  been  to  re-erect  the 
Tabernacle  at  Gilgal.  It  was  here  that,  many  years 
afterwards,  he  appointed  Saul  to  meet  him,  in  order  to 
offer  the  burnt  -  offerings  and  peace  -  offerings  of  his 
consecration  and  coronation — sacrifices  which  could  only 
be  offered  on  the  brasen  altar  before  the  Tabernacle. 
That  this  altar  was  that  constructed  by  Bezalel,  and  that 
the   tent  which   later   stood  in   Gibeon  was   that   made 


RETURNED    TO    GILGAL.  31 

by  Moses,  is  affirmed  in  the  text  of  2  Cliron.  i.  3,  5. 
Tiiey  could  not,  therefore,  have  fallen  into  Philistine 
hands  at  Shiloh. 

The  re  -  erected  Tabernacle,  in  its  old  place  in  the 
plains  of  Jericho,  stood  there  for  many  years.  The 
note  of  time  in  1  Samuel  vii.  2  cannot  be  taken  to 
refer  to  this,  as  the  years  there  mentioned  do  not  represent 
the  time  the  ark  was  at  Kirjath  -  Jearira,  that  time 
including  the  periods  of  Samuel's,  Saul's,  and  part  of 
David's  reigns.  They  were  rather  the  '  twenty  years  * 
in  which  the  national  spirit  was  gradually  adjusting 
itself  to  the  true  relations  which  had  formerly  been 
established  between  Jehovah  and  His  people.  Under 
the  wise  and  gracious  rule  of  Samuel  the  house  of 
Israel  was  drawn  together  after  the  Lord  {margin ^ 
1  Samuel  vii.  2).  Sorrow  and  suffering  had  effectually 
done  their  work,  and  the  people  were  now  willing  to 
be  guided  into  the  heartfelt  monotheistic  worship  on 
which  their  deliverance  depended.  When  all  was  ready, 
and  a  spirit  of  humble  trustfulness  was  seen  to  have 
penetrated  the  assembly,  Samuel  called  a  national 
convention  at  Mizpah,  one  of  the  three  centres  from 
which  he  judged  Israel.  The  Mizpah  here  referred  to 
is  that  mentioned  in  Joshua  xviii.  25  as  one  of  the  cities 
of  Benjamin,  and  is  tliat  now  known  as  Nehy  Samwil, 
five  miles  north  of  Jerusalem. 

Here  they  were  speedily  attacked  by  their  overlords 
the  Philistines.  As  at  Rephidim  the  intercession  of 
Moses  gained  victory  over  the  Amalekites,  so  here  the 
prayers  of  Samuel  prevailed.     A  great  storm  discomfited 


32  THE    TABERNACLE. 

the  Philistines,  and  they  were  chased  by  the  men  from 
Mizpah  till  they  came  unto  Beth  -  Car  ( =  home  of 
pasture),  where  probably  their  base-camp  lay. 

So  critical  an  authority  as  Professor  G.  A.  Smith 
places  Beth-Car  at  Ain  Kdrim,  four  miles  south  -  west 
of  Jerusalem,  where  is  a  famous  spring.  The  pursuit 
thus  covered  eight  or  nine  miles,  and  the  power  of 
Philistia  was  broken.  Doubtless  some  thousands  of  the 
enemy  were  slain,  but  of  these  particulars  we  are  told 
nothing.  What  we  are  told  is,  however,  of  fuller 
significance.  It  is  that  the  victorious  army  went  to 
the  scene  of  their  former  defeat,  between  Beth-Shemesh 
and  Kirjath-Jearim,  and  there,  on  the  very  spot  where 
the  ark  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  its  foes,  they 
selected  a  great  stone,  already  consecrated  by  sacrifice 
(1  Samuel  vi.  15),  which  they  called  Ebenezer  (=  stone 
of  help),  and  which,  after  the  example  of  Jacob  at 
Bethel,  was  anointed  with  oil.  This  was  done  in  the 
spirit  of  humble  gratitude,  and  as  an  acknowledgment 
that  the  event  there  celebrated,  however  dark  it  seemed 
at  the  time,  was  in  reality  the  turning-point  of  the 
national  fortunes,  and  the  '  help  *  that  Israel  needed. 
Thus  did  they  kiss  the  rod  with  which  they  had  been 
smitten.  No  other  action  could  have  been  so  expressive 
of  the  change  which  had  passed  over  the  people  in  the 
intervening  years. 

The  stone  so  set  up  is  described  as  being  *  between 
Mizpah  and  Shen.'  This  Mizpah  (=  watch-tower)  is  that 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  cities  of  Judah  in  Joshua  xv.  38, 
and  is  represented  by  the  Arab  village  of  Deir  elSaiva, 


DEFEAT    OF    THE   PHILISTINES.  33 

placed  on  the  summit  of  a  mountain  south  of  the  Wady 
Ismail.  It  is  less  than  four  miles  east  of  Beth-Shemesh 
(here  abbreviated  to  Shen).  Midway  between  the  two 
places  is  Deir  Abdn,  a  large  village,  in  which  stands 
a  great  rock  bearing  the  name  of  Deir  Eban  (=  Convent 
of  the  Rock).  Previous  to  its  consecration  as  a  national 
memorial,  it  is  mentioned  as  the  great  stone  in  the 
field  of  Joshua  the  Beth-Shemite,  beside  which  the  ark 
stayed  when  it  returned  from  the  Philistine  cities 
(1  Samuel  vi.  14).  We  are  thus  to  understand  the 
expression  *  Samuel  took  a  stone  and  set  it^  (1  Samuel 
vii.  12)  in  the  sense  of  selection  and  appropriation,  and 
not  of  actual  elevation. 

12.  This  act  of  public  contrition  was  the  turning-point 
of  the  national  fortunes.  During  the  lifetime  of  Samuel 
the  Philistines  came  no  more  into  the  border  of  Israel. 

The  ark  remained  at  Kirjath-Jearim,  four  miles  east 
of  Beth-Shemesh.  The  Tabernacle  was  at  Gilgal,  but 
without  any  ofiiciating  High-priest,  Ahitub  being  under 
the  ban  pronounced  on  Eli*s  family.  He  was  perhaps 
15  years  of  age  at  the  time  Shiloh  fell,^  and,  with  his 
brother  Ichabod,  was  the  sole  representative  of  the  house 
of  Ithamar.  Samuel  did  not  dare  to  recall  to  office  the 
family  of  Eleazar,  and  yet  the  sanctuary  of  God  could 
not  be  neglected.  He  himself  was  a  Levite.  In  this 
emergency  a  son  of  Amariah,  of  the  rejected  family  of 

^  The  mention  of  his  son  Ahijah,  as  being  in  the  camp  of  Saul  soon  after 
his  assumption  of  rule,  is  an  indicatiou  of  the  length  of  Samuel's  judgeship 
(1  Samuel  xiv.  3). 


34  THE    TABERNACLE. 

Eleazar,  was  called  upon  to  act,  not  as  High-priest,  but 
as  ^  Ruler  of  the  House  of  God.*  His  name  was  Ahitub, 
as  was  that  of  Eli's  grandson,  and  he  appears  with  this 
name  and  designation  in  1  Chron.  ix.  11,  and  Nehemiah 
xi.  11.  He  was  the  grandfather  of  Zadok,  in  whose 
person  the  family  of  Eleazar  was  restored  to  office. 

How  far  the  Tabernacle  services  at  Gilgal  conformed 
to  the  ritual  of  the  law  we  may  best  judge  by  concluding 
that  the  duties  of  the  High-priest  remained  in  abeyance, 
but  that  the  levitical  and  priestly  duties  were  regularly 
performed  under  the  direction  of  the  ruler  of  the  House 
of  God.^  Such  were  the  maimed  rites  of  Jahvism  which 
followed  the  destruction  of  Shiloh. 


^  In  later  times  we  find  that  Azariah  V.  was  High -priest  in  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  10),  and  also  'ruler  of  the  House  of  God' 
(verse  13).  As  such  he  co-operated  with  Hezekiah  in  appointing  certain  men 
to  be  over  the  storehouses  of  dedicated  things.  It  would  appear  that  the  two 
offices  were  distinct,  but  might  be  held  by  the  same  person.  In  the  history 
of  Jeremiah  (xx.  1)  there  is  mention  of  a  certain  priest  named  Pashhur,  who 
was  *  chief  officer  in  the  house  of  the  Lord.'  We  have  here  an  instance 
of  the  same  or  a  similar  office  being  held  by  a  man  who  was  neither  High- 
priest  nor  the  son  of  a  High-priest,  as  he  belonged  to  the  course  of  Immer. 
If  the  two  offices  were  the  same,  this  was  an  irregularity,  owing  to  the 
disorganized  state  of  public  affairs. 


35 


CHAPTER    II. 

TO  THE  BUILDING  OF  THE  TEMPLE. 

nPHE  Tabernacle  being  re-erected  at  Gilgal,  and  the 
-^  Ebenezer  rock  being  consecrated  as  a  memorial, 
the  Twelve  Tribes  entered  upon  a  career  of  peaceful 
development.  Samuel  was  the  one  man  to  whom  the 
whole  nation  looked.  As  a  Levite  he  had  no  special 
duties  in  the  House  of  God.  The  courts  held  at  its 
East  Gate  were  principally  for  the  settlement  of  cases 
of  ceremonial  purity,  and  were  presided  over  by  Levites 
and  priests.  There  were,  however,  many  other  *  hard 
cases'  of  civil  and  criminal  law,  corresponding  to  those 
brought  before  Moses  by  the  advice  of  his  father-in-law 
(Exodus  xviii.).^  These  were  appropriately  brought 
before  Samuel,  who,  like  Moses,  was  a  Kohathite  Levite. 
These  courts  were  not  always  held  at  Gilgal,  but  at 
Bethel,  Gilgal,  and  Mizpah,  to  each  of  which  places  an 
annual  visit  was  paid.  The  selection  of  two  centres  for 
the   administration  of  justice  other  than   that  at  which 

1  The  difficulty  as  to  the  names  in  this  family  may  be  met  by  adoptmg 
Ewald's  suggestion  that  'Jethro'  signifies  prefect,  and  was  a  title  held  by 
Reuel,  who  was  the  father  of  Hobab  (Numbers  x.  29).  In  this  way  Hobab 
would  be  the  brother-in-law  of  Moses,  as  is  stated  in  Judges  iv.  11,  and 
Moses  the  son-in-law  of  Jethro,  as  written  in  Exodus  iii.  1.  Jethro  returned 
to  his  own  land  (Exodus  xviii.  27),  but  Hobab  accompanied  the  host 
(Judges  iv.  11  ;  1  Sara.  xv.  6).  Later  scholarship  suggests  that  both  were  the 
Arabian  names  of  Moses'  father-in-law. 


36  THE    TABERNACLE. 

the  Tabernacle  stood,  was  in  itself  a  new  departure  in 
the  history  of  Hebrew  jurisprudence,  which  could  only 
have  been  justified  by  the  revelation  of  the  Urim  and 
Thummim,  as  declaring  the  will  of  God.  Bethel  was, 
however,  associated  with  the  vision  of  God  given  to 
Jacob,  and  Mizpah  with  the  remarkable  interposition 
which  had  so  lately  given  liberty  to  the  nation.  To 
the  Hebrew  any  spot  at  which  Jehovah  had  manifested 
Himself  became,  b}'-  that  act,  for  ever  sacred.  It  may 
thus  have  been  thought  that  the  sanctity  of  these  two 
places  was  equal  to  that  of  Gilgal,  where  the  Captain  of 
the  Lord's  host  had  appeared  to  Joshua  (Joshua  v.  13-15). 

1.  As  the  years  passed,  and  Samuel  grew  feebler,  be 
made  his  two  sons  judges  over  Israel.  A  name  has 
probably  dropped  out  of  the  Hebrew  text  of  1  Samuel 
viii.  2,  as  it  is  hardly  likely  that  both  judges  should 
have  been  stationed  in  far-south  Beersheba.  Josephus' 
paraphrase  of  the  history  has  retained  the  second  name, 
which  is  Bethel  {Antiquities^  vi.  3,  §  2). 

While  doing  this  Samuel  took  a  step  far  in  advance 
of  anything  yet  done  in  the  way  of  liberalizing  and 
delocalizing  the  institutions  of  Mosaism.  It  was  nothing 
less  than  the  building  of  an  altar  at  his  own  home  in 
Eamah,  which  he  felt  less  and  less  able  to  leave.  This 
was  the  less  revolutionary  as  there  was  no  ark  at  Gilgal 
before  which  to  burn  incense. 

There  were  many  E-amahs  (  =  heights)  in  the  land. 
Kearly  every  division  of  the  tribes  had  a  place  so  named. 
Among  these  were — 


SAMUEL'S    LAST    DAYS.  37 

(1)  Ramah  of  Benjamin  (Joshua  xviii.  25). 

(2)  Ramah  of  Ephraira  (Judges  iv.  5). 

(3)  Ramah  of  Naphtali  (Joshua  xix.  36). 

(4)  Ramah  of  Asher  (Joshua  xix.  29). 

(5)  Ramah  (or  Ramoth)  of  Gad  (2  Kings  viii.  28-29). 

(6)  Remeth  (Joshua  xix.  21)  or  Ramoth  of   Issachar 

(1  Chron.  vi.  73). 

It  would  be  in  harmony  with  these  examples  that  in 
the  hill  country  of  Judah  there  should  be  a  spot  so 
named,  the  distinction  between  Gibeah,  a  hill,  and 
Ramah,  a  height,  being,  that  an  isolated  hill  might 
be  found  on  comparatively  low  -  lying  ground,  but 
a  Ramah  is  to  be  sought  for  only  on  elevated  land. 

In  the  115  place-names  given  in  the  Book  of 
Joshua  as  belonging  to  the  division  of  Judah,  the 
name  of  Ramah  does  not  occur — except  as  a  descriptive 
or  alternative  name  for  Baalath-beer  (Joshua  xix.  8), 
where  it  is  distinguished  from  all  other  Ramahs  as 
Ramah  of  the  Negeb.  This,  however,  would  not 
prevent  the  name  being  given  to  a  suitable  spot 
which  was  colonised  or  inhabited  after  the  conquest. 
Such  would  seem  to  have  been  the  history  of  the 
Ramah  in  which  Samuel  was  born,  and  where  he  died 
and  was  buried,  as  it  probably  was  of  some  of  the  other 
Ramahs,  several  of  which  are  unmentioned  by  Joshua. 

2.  Two  and  a  half  miles  north  of  Hebron,  the  road 
to  the  north,  having  crossed  the  plain  of  Mamre,  climbs 


38  THE    TABEENACLE. 

a  gentle  ascent  of  three  hundred  feet.  That  gained,  the 
traveller  finds  himself  in  the  saddle  of  an  old  Roman 
road,  still  roughly  paved,  with  a  slight  hilly  projection 
on  either  side.  That  to  the  left  is  3,340  feet  and  that  to 
the  right  3,370  feet  above  the  level  of  the  Mediterranean. 
These  are  the  two  Ramahs  contained  in  the  plural  word 
Ramathaim.  Robinson  found  the  name  Ramah  still  in 
use  here,  disguised  in  the  Arabic  er-Rdmeh. 

From  this  point  the  northern  horizon  falls  gradually 
away,  till  at  Jerusalem  it  is  nearly  a  thousand  feet  lower 
(=  2,593  feet).  To  the  south  a  similar  decline  is  per- 
ceptible, and  with  the  exception  of  the  hill  on  which 
Jutta  stands  (3,747  feet),  the  altitude  of  these  twin 
heights  is  not  attained  within  100  miles  west  of  the 
Jordan. 

Through  a  cleft  in  the  hills  the  waters  of  the  blue 
Mediterranean  are  seen.  Within  an  hour's  walk  of  this 
Ramah  is  the  ancient  city  where  the  three  Patriarchs  and 
their  wives,  except  Rachel,  were  buried.  Around  these 
tombs  sprang  up  the  city  of  Kirjath-Arba,  after  its 
conquest  called  Hebron  (=  association). 

Josephus  says  that  it  was  the  oldest  city  in  Palestine, 
and  it  was  visited  by  the  spies  sent  by  Moses  to  inspect  the 
land  (Numbers  xiii.  22).  It  was  taken  by  Joshua  (Joshua 
xiv.  12  and  xv.  14),  and  owing  to  its  great  reputation, 
as  the  last  resting-place  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob, 
special  provision  was  made  for  its  security.  It  was  made 
a  city  of  refuge,  and  given,  with  its  suburbs,  as  a  residence 
for  the  priests  and  the  Kohathite  Levites  (Joshua  xxi. 
10-13),  being  the  only  city  thus  jointly  occupied.     The 


SAMUEL'S    ALTAR    AT    RA]\IAH.  39 

suburbs,  forming  a  circle  around  the  city  of  one  or  two 
thousand  cubits  (=  500  to  1,000  yards),  (Numbers  xxxv. 
4-5),^  were  given  to  the  clergy.  The  fields  of  the  city 
and  its  villages  were  given  to  Caleb.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  this  was  done,  so  as  to  doubly  and  trebly 
secure  the  sepulchres  of  the  ancestors  of  the  race. 

It  is  impossible  to  do  more  than  to  establish  in  a  general 
way  a  connection  between  the  Kohathite  settlement  in  and 
around  Hebron,  and  similar  settlements  in  the  division 
of  Ephraim,  of  which  there  were  four  (Joshua  xxi. 
21-22).  Of  these  the  principal  was  Shechem,  described 
as  being  in  the  hill  country  of  Ephraim,  which,  like 
Hebron,  was  one  of  the  three  cities  of  refuge  on  the  west 
of  Jordan. 

3.  There  were  twenty  generations  from  Jacob  to  Samuel 
(1  Chron.  vi.  33-38).  Some  time  during  the  period 
of  the  Judges,  Zuph  or  Zophai,  an  Ephraimite  Levite  of 
the  sons  of  Kohath,  migrated  from  the  northern  to  the 
southern  settlement  of  his  clan.  He  settled  on  the  then 
bare  and  stony  highland  to  the  north  of  Hebron,  which 
from  his  occupation  of  it  came  to  be  known  as  the  Land 
of  Zuph,  or  Ramathaim-Zophim  (=  double  high-place 
of  Zuph),   (1  Samuel  i.  1  and  ix.  5). 


^  A  distinction  was  made  between  walled  and  unwalled  cities.  In  the 
case  of  the  former  the  suburbs  or  pasture-fields  were  to  be  1,000  cubits  from 
the  wall  of  the  city  round  about.  In  the  smaller  and  unwalled  villages,  the 
*  suburbs  '  were  to  be  2,000  cubits  on  every  side,  ineasured  from  some  central 
paint  in  the  hamlet,  around  which  the  houses  were  grouped.  Disputes  would 
thus  be  of  rare  occurrence.  These  Levitical  pasture-fields  were  inalienable 
(Lev.  XXV.  34). 


40  THE    TABERNACLE. 

His  descendants  in  the  direct  line  are  given  in  1  Samuel 
and  1  Chronicles  in  the  following  genealogies : — 

1  Samuel  i.  1.  1  Chronicles  vi.  34. 


Zuph.  Zuph  or  Zophai  (v.  26). 

I  I 

Tohu.  Toah  or  Nahath  (v.  26). 

Elihu.  Eliel  or  Eliab  (v.  26). 

Jeroham.  Jeroham. 

Elkanah.  Elkanah. 

Samuel.  Samuel. 


It  would  thus  seem  that  the  migration  took  place  five 
generations,  or  less  than  two  centuries,  before  the  birth  of 
Samuel.  His  childhood  was  spent  at  Shiloh,  but  as  the 
meridian  of  life  passed,  and  its  main  activities  were  left 
behind,  he  retired  to  the  city  of  his  fathers,  *for  there 
was  his  house.' 

Here  *he  judged  Israel.'  But  he  did  more.  *  He 
built  there  an  altar  unto  the  Lord '  (1  Samuel  vii.  17). 
In  doing  this  Samuel  followed  the  example  of  Abraham, 
and  did  not  deem  that  he  was  contravening  the  law 
against  the  building  of  private  and  unauthorized  altars. 

The  erection  of  this  altar,  on  one  of  the  high-places 
of  the  land,  did  not  involve  the  duplication  of  the 
Tabernacle,  or  any  part  of  it.  What  it  did  involve  was 
that  the  altar  should  stand  within  an  enclosed  space,  to 
correspond  with  the  outer  or  eastern  court  of  the 
Tabernacle.  Also  that  provision  should  be  made  for  the 
sacrifice  of  animals  by  duly  ordained  priests  and  Levites. 


THE    FUNCTIONS    OF    SACEIFICE.         41 

As  parts  of  every  burnt-offering  were  washed,  and  the 
officiating  priests  required  frequent  ablutions,  every  altar 
of  Jahvism  required  an  abundant  supply  of  water.  These 
were  the  prime  necessities  of  the  case,  when  once  the 
erection  had  been  decided  on. 

As  the  laws  of  Moses,  administered  by  Samuel,  comprised 
an  ecclesiastical,  a  civil,  and  a  criminal  code,  and,  in 
many  cases,  required  that  restitution  should  be  made 
both  to  the  complainant  and  to  the  ordinances  of  religion, 
an  altar,  where  such  sacrifices  and  sin-offerings  could  be 
received,  became  a  necessity  of  every  supreme  court  of 
justice. 

The  object  and  application  of  law  amongst  the  Hebrews 
was  not  solely  to  secure  that  even-handed  justice  should 
obtain  between  man  and  man,  but  also  that  every 
transgressor  should  be  purged  of  his  sin  by  sacrifice ; 
and,  by  penitence  and  prayer,  should  obtain  the  Divine 
forgiveness. 

In  the  case  of  minor  courts,  one  of  which  was  held  in 
every  Levitical  city  and  town,  the  convicted  defendants 
were  sent  to  the  central  sanctuary  to  attain  these  ends. 
A  general  clause  to  cover  all  such  cases  was  that  of  the 
national  sacrifices,  constantly  offered,  and  of  the  institution 
of  a  great  day  of  Atonement  for  the  whole  nation. 

Samuel,  not  unwisely,  judged  that  by  the  erection  of 
an  altar,  near  to  himself  as  the  fountain  of  justice,  he 
would  be  forwarding  the  best  interests  of  his  people  and 
of  true  religion  amongst  them. 

The  existence  of  this  altar,  a  few  miles  from  Hebron, 
was  without  doubt   a  chief   cause    of  David's   choosing 


42  THE    TABERNACLE. 

Hebron  as  the  capital  city  of  his  kingdom,  till  the 
conquest  of  Jerusalem.  With  his  departure  it  was 
probably  removed,  the  enclosure-walls  remaining.  These 
would  remain  undisturbed  during  the  whole  period  of 
Jewish  national  life,  as  having  once  been  employed  in  the 
worship  of  Jehovah.  Their  partial  removal  would  thus 
date  from  times  subsequent  to  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  under 
Titus.  The  tradition  of  some  unusual  sanctity  still 
survives  amongst  the  peasantry  of  the  neighbourhood, 
who  name  this  ruin  Rdniet  el-KhulU,  the  hill  of  the 
Friend,  i.e.  Abraham. 

4.  Dr.  Edward  Kobinson  twice  visited  er-Edmehy  at 
an  interval  of  fourteen  years.  His  first  account,  written 
in  April,  1838,  contains  the  following  description  : — 

*At  one  hour  from  Hebron,  a  blind  path  went  off  to  the 
right,  at  right  angles,  leading  to  Tekoa ;  and  on  it,  almost  five 
minutes  walk  from  our  road,  are  the  foundations  of  an  immense 
building,  which  excited  our  curiosity.  We  found  the 
substructions  of  an  edifice,  which  would  seem  to  have  been 
commenced,  but  never  completed.  They  consist  of  two  walls, 
apparently  of  a  large  enclosure,  one  facing  toward  the  south- 
west, two  hundred  feet  long;  and  the  other,  at  right  angles, 
facing  north-west,  one  hundred  and  sixty  feet  long,  with  a 
space  left  in  the  middle  of  it,  as  if  for  a  portal.  There  are 
only  two  courses  of  hewn  stones  above  ground,  each  3  feet 
4  inches  high;  one  of  the  stones  measured  15^  feet  long  by 
3  feet  thick.  In  the  south-west  angle  is  a  well  or  cistern 
arched  over,  but  not  deep.  There  are  no  stones  or  ruins  of  any 
kind  lying  around,  to  mark  that  the  walls  were  ever  carried 

higher The  spot  is  called  by  the   Arabs   Rdmet 

el-KhaliV  {Biblical  Researches,  vol.  i.  p.  215). 


RAMET   EL-KRULIL.  43 


In  May,  1852,  Dr.  Robinson  again  visited  the  spot, 
approaching  it  from  the  north,  and  wrote  as  follows  : — 

'Rising  gradually,  we  turned  at  4.15  to  the  left  at  a  right 
angle  ;  and  came,  in  seven  minutes,  across  the  fields,  to  the 
immense  foundations  we  had  formerly  visited.  .  .  .  Those 
inexplicable  walls  remain  as  when  we  saw  them  in  1838, 
except  that  the  covering  to  the  well  was  gone.  This  well 
is  of  large  circumference,  and  about  10  feet  deep  to  the  surface 
of  the  water.  It  is  said  to  be  strictly  a  fountain.  The  course 
of  the  longest  wall  is  south,  80°  east. 

'  The  foundations  are  regarded  by  the  common  people  as 
belonging  to  the  ruins  of  er-Rdmeh,  which  cover  the  hill  to  the 
north,  and  extend  down  to  this  spot. 

'  We  now  turned  up  the  hill  er-Rdmeh,  and  reached  the  top 
in  six  minutes.  Here  and  on  the  slope  are  the  remains  of 
a  large  village.  The  ground  all  the  way  is  strewn  with  ruins  of 
dwellings  covering  some  acres,  with  hewn  stones  among  them. 
There  is  on  the  top  a  cistern  excavated  in  the  rock.     .     .     . 

'  In  respect  to  the  immense  walls,  which  form  the  most 
imposing  feature  of  the  place,  I  find  as  yet  no  satisfactory 
explanation.     .     .     . 

'  They  exhibit  none  of  the  tokens  of  ecclesiastical  architecture, 
and  do  not  of  themselves  suggest  a  church.     .     .     . 

*  We  left  er-Rdmeh  at  4.45,  descending  the  hill  toward  the 
north.  At  the  foot  was  an  excavated  cistern,  now  dry,  with 
steps  to  descend  into  it '  {Biblical  Researches ^  vol.  iii.  pp.  278-281). 

In  furtherance  of  the  suggestion  that  we  have  in 
these  walls,  lying  below  the  ancient  town,  the  remains 
of  an  enclosure  built  by  Samuel  around  an  altar,  I  may 
remark : — 

{a)  The  measurements  coincide  with  those  of  the 
ancient  cubit.  The  stones  of  the  walls  are  given  as 
40   inches   in    thickness,   or   3^   feet.      This    was    three 


44  THE    TABERNACLE. 

building  cubits  of  11  feet  =  3|  feet.  The  walls  were  thus 
six  cubits  high,  the  curtains  of  the  tabernacle  enclosure 
being  five. 

(b)  The  two  remaining  walls  are  in  length  160  and 
200  feet  respectively.^  These  are  outside  measurements. 
Hebrew  surface  measures  are  uniformly  interior  measures, 
taken  with  the  large  cubit.  We  may  thus  conclude 
that,  as  at  Sinai,  the  space  enclosed  for  the  worship  of 
the  people  around  the  altar  was  a  square.  This  would 
be  a  square  of  100  cubits  (  =  150  feet),  whereas  that  was 
a  square  of  50  cubits. 

The  precedent  would  doubtless  be  followed  of  a  portion 
of  the  altar-platform  being  placed  to  the  west  of  the 
altar,  adjoining  which  was  a  laver  with  water.  To  these 
purposes  30  cubits  (=  45  feet)  would  seem  to  have  been 
allocated,  though  it  may  have  been  one-third  the  length 
of  the  eastern  court,  or  33^  cubits  (=  50  feet). 

(c)  The  enclosed  spring  and  cistern  within  the  enclosure 
lie  in  the  south-west  angle.  This  is  in  the  true  position 
for  sacrificial  purposes,  as,  in  the  Temples  of  the  Jews, 
the  water  supply  was  always  placed  on  the  western  side 
near  the  north  gate. 

(d)  The  corrected  course  taken  by  the  longer  wall  is 
within  four  degrees  of  due  east.  As,  however,  the  sun 
apparently  rose  southward  in  the  latitude  of  Eamah,  and  no 
scientific  instruments  were  in  use,  the  error  in  orientation 
would  thus  arise. 


^  According  to  Sir  Charles  "Warren,  200  by  165  feet.     If  the  thickness  of 
the  walls  be  added,  the  measurements  will  be  218f  x  164|  feet. 


THE    RAMET   ENCLOSURE.  45 

The  walls  were  so  built  as  that  worshippers  standing 
within  them  should  have  their  backs  to  the  rising  sun. 
This  was  essential.  The  oblong  rectangle  rightly  lies 
from  east  to  west. 

{e)  The  opening  in  the  west  wall — if  there  were  one, 
which  is  doubtful  —  had  nothing  corresponding  with  it 
in  the  tabernacle  enclosure.  This  is  accounted  for  by 
the  fact  that  there  was  no  second  court  to  the  west  at 
Bamah,  as  at  Shiloh,  and  that  this  opening  would  be  for 
the  sole  use  of  the  officiating  priests  and  Levites  from 
the  neighbouring  city  of  Hebron. 

(/)  The  hewn  stones  found  in  the  village  higher  up 
the  hill  were  possibly  carried  off  from  the  two  walls, 
though  Mr.  Gr.  A.  Murray,  of  Hebron,  suggests  that  the 
removed  stones  may  have  been  taken  to  form  the  first 
enclosure  built  around  the  Cave  of  Machpelah.  This  use 
of  them  would  not  have  been  deemed  a  desecration.  The 
foundations  of  these  walls,  when  found,  will  probably 
show  a  large  gate  opening  on  the  east  side,  and  another 
on  the  north,  opposite  to  the  line  of  the  altar. 

{g)  The  Haram  walls  of  Jerusalem  and  Hebron  are 
largely  Phoenician  in  character.  The  fact  that  the 
walls  at  er-Rdmeh  resemble  them  in  character  of 
masonry  is  in  favour  of  their  being  early  Israelitish 
work.  The  fact  that  there  are  no  hewn  stones  or  ruins 
of  any  kind  to  show  that  the  walls  were  ever  carried 
higher  is  a  point  of  cardinal  importance,  as  fixing  the 
use  for  which  they  were  built.  That  use,  it  is  suggested, 
was  to  screen  an  altar  within  the  enclosure,  as  the 
hangings   of    the   tabernacle   courts    screened    its    altar 


46  THE    TABERNACLE. 

from  curious  and  irreverent  eyes.  If  this  was  their 
purpose,  that  altar  could  only  have  been  the  one  built 
by  Samuel. 

5.  Happily  we  are  in  a  position  to  test  the  foregoing 
suggestion  that  the  ruins  of  er-Rdmeh  are  those  of  the 
ancient  Ramah  of  Samuel,  by  an  appeal  to  contemporary 
evidence  of  unimpeachable  authority.  "VVe  have  in  chapters 
ix.  and  x.  of  1  Samuel  an  account  of  a  visit  to  Ramathaim, 
which  contains  many  topographical  details.  These  we 
may  compare  with  Dr.  Robinson's  description  of  the  site. 

The  following  are  the  principal  coincidences  between 
the  two,  but  there  may  be  others  which  a  more  complete 
examination  of  the  site  would  afford. 

[a)  Oq  the  fourth  day  after  leaving  Gibeon,  or  the 
estate  at  Zelah  near  to  it,  Saul  and  his  servant  approached 
Ramah  before  the  hour  of  the  evening  meal.  They  were 
*in  the  land  of  Zuph,'  and,  as  an  afterthought,  it  was 
determined  to  consult  the  seer,  Samuel.  As  they  ascended 
the  hill  on  the  north  side  of  the  city  they  met  women 
going  to  draw  water  from  the  *  excavated  cistern,'  which 
Dr.  Robinson  noticed  at  the  foot  of  the  hill. 

[h)  Leaving  them,  the  two  men  ascended  the  hill,  not 
by  the  way  of  the  Roman  road,  but  by  a  path  which  led 
directly  to  the  crest  of  the  hill  before  them.  Here  lay 
a  large  village,  all  the  way  from  the  crest  of  the  hill  to 
the  stone-enclosure  being  now  strewn  with  ruins  of 
dwellings. 

The  travellers,  having  crossed  the  peak  and  come  within 
the  city,  met  Samuel  on  his  way  to  the  high-place. 


SAUL^S    VISIT    TO    SAMUEL.  47 

(c)  It  was  *in  tlie  gate/ ^  i.e.  the  gate  leading  to  the 
high-place  south  of  the  city,  that  Saul  addressed  Samuel. 
The  result  was  that  together  they  went  to  the  guest- 
chamber  which  lay  within  the  enclosure — Jewish  sacrifices 
of  peace  being  usually  eaten  in  the  precincts  of  the 
sanctuary.^ 

(d)  The  feast  over,  Saul  accompanied  Samuel  to  his 
home  in  Ramah — the  expression  *  came  down '  (verse  25) 
having  reference  rather  to  the  dignity  of  the  high-place 
than  to  the  comparative  altitudes  of  the  city  and  the  altar. 

(e)  The  next  morning^  Samuel,  accompanied  by  Saul, 
went  out,  '  going  down  to  the  end  of  the  city.'  TVe 
gather  from  this,  as  from  the  first  meeting  of  Samuel 
and  Saul,  that  the  house  of  the  former  was  in  the 
city  and  above  the  place  of  the  altar.  From  this 
it  would  appear  that  Saul  was  privately  anointed, 
as  was  fitting,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  altar,  and 
did  not  leave  the  city  by  the  way  he  had  entered  it. 
It  will  be  remembered  that  Dr.  Robinson  walked  from 
the  main  road  to  the  *  immense  foundations'  in  seven 
minutes,  and  from  them  to  the  top  of  the  hill  in  six 
minutes.     As  the  position  of  Samuel's  home  is  unknown, 


^  This  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  the  city  was  surrounded  by  walls. 
Hebron  still  has  gat€s  at  the  ends  of  its  streets,  but  has  no  surrounding  wall. 

2  The  word  used  for  *  guest-chamber  '  al&o  occurs,  as  descriptive  of  a  part 
of  the  Temple,  in  Jer.  xxxv.  2,  4,  and  Ezek.  xl.  17.  In  these  and  other 
passages  a  sacrificial  dining-room  is  meant.  Such  rooms  were  required  by  the 
ordinance  of  Lev,  vi.  16,  26,  and  were  built  as  a  part  of  every  temple. 

'  Samuel  is  said  to  have  summoned  his  guest  '  about  the  spring  of  the  day.' 
As  the  morning  sacrifice  was  always  killed  before  sunrise,  and  Samuel  would 
attend  this,  the  probability  is  in  favour  of  their  havmg  gone  together  to 
the  altar.  * 


48  THE    TABEENACLE. 

the  time  generally  taken  to  cover  the  distance  of  this 
early  walk  was  probably  less  than  fifteen  minutes.  It 
is  not  stated  that  Samuel  accompanied  Saul  to  the 
junction  of  the  roads,  though  he  probably  did  so,  as 
a  token  of  respect  to  his  future  sovereign. 

(/)  Other  confirmations  of  the  identity  of  er-Rdtneh 
with  Samuel's  Ramah  are  to  be  found  in  the  fact  of 
David's  having  fled  from  the  court  of  Saul  to  Samuel 
(1  Samuel  xix.  18).  As  the  E-amahs  of  Benjamin  and 
Ephraim  were  situated  close  to  Gibeon,  it  is  unlikely 
that  David  would  find  any  safety  in  places  so  few  miles 
away  from  his  enemy,  or  that  he  should  expect  it. 
There  is  positive  evidence  to  the  contrary  in  the  fact 
that  Saul  himself  went  toward  Eamah,  and  at  the  great 
well  that  is  in  Secu  made  inquiries  for  Samuel  and 
David,  having  previously  been  told  that  they  were  living 
at  Naioth  in  Eamah.  Naioth  is  the  word  used  in 
Psalm  xxiii.  2,  where  it  is  translated  *  pastures.'  It  is 
here,  probably,  a  descriptive  noun,  and  not  a  proper 
name.  Had  it  been  so,  Saul,  when  at  Secu,  would  not 
have  needed  to  inquire  where  the  'pastures  of  Eamah' 
were.  He  did  so,  and  went  to  Naioth,  or  the  pastures, 
with  the  result  that,  while  he  prophesied,  David  escaped. 

In  this  case  the  whereabouts  of  the  great  well  of 
Secu  is  a  prime  factor,  in  deciding  which  of  the  many 
Eamahs  is  meant  as  that  of  Samuel's  home. 

The  plain  of  Mamre,  to  the  immediate  north  of  Hebron, 
is  drained  by  the  brook  Eshcol,  running  to  the  south- 
west. Between  two  arms  of  the  brook  is  a  famous  well, 
fed  by  a  spring  within.      The  former  is  known  as  the 


SAUL'S    RETUElSr    TO    GIBEON.  49 

Sirah  Well  (2  Samuel  iil.  26),  and  the  latter  as  Ain 
Surdh.  In  this  pleasant  vale,  with  its  orchards  and 
vineyards,  we  have  the  well  Secu,  beside  which  Saul 
rested,  as  Abner  afterwards  did.  It  is  not  more  than 
three  or  four  miles  either  from  er-Rdmeh  or  from  Hebron. 
It  is  possibly  one  of  the  springs  of  Caleb  (Joshua  xv.  19). 

6.  The  narrative  before  us  yields,  not  only  these  rich 
fruits  of  topographical  interest,  but  others  equally  welcome 
in  the  department  of  geography. 

{a)  In  the  opinion  of  the  late  Dean  Stanley  the 
situation  of  Samuel's  Ramah  and  its  allied  questions  is 
*  the  most  complicated  and  difficult  problem  of  sacred 
topography.'  It  will  have  become  evident  that  it  is  so 
solely  in  the  refusal  to  accept  as  Kamah  Mr.  TValcott's 
and  Mr.  Van  de  Yelde's  Edmet,  a  little  north  of  Hebron. 
When  further  scriptural  evidence  is  adduced  it  will  be 
found  that  there  is  in  this  no  variance  with  the  existing 
localities. 

Speaking  to  Saul  in  the  gate  of  his  city,  Samuel  told 
him  that  he  would  find  two  men  by  Rachel's  sepulchre 
in  the  border  of  Benjamin.  The  site  of  this  tomb  is 
undisputed.  It  stands  beside  the  road  about  one  mile 
north  of  Bethlehem.^  The  boundary  between  Benjamin 
and  Judah  thus  ran  between  the  two,  the  territory  of  the 

*  Bethlehem  was  a  city  in  the  division  of  Judah.  The  name  first  occurs 
in  Judges  xvii.  7,  where  it  is  termed  Bethlehem- Judah.  Its  'father'  or 
founder  was  Salma,  a  son  of  Nahshon,  first  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
(1  Chron.  ii.  51).  It  was  thus  occupied  immediately  on  Joshua's  conquest  of 
the  land,  though  it  does  not  find  a  place  in  Joshua's  record  of  the  cities  of 
the  land. 


50  THE    TABERNACLE. 

former  being  extended,  in  a  wedge-shape,  just  far  enough 
to  include  the  tomb  of  their  great  ancestress.  It  is,  if 
possible,  a  still  more  inevitable  deduction  that  the  'land 
of  Zuph '  (1  Samuel  ix.  5)  lay  to  the  south  of  Bethlehem- 
in-Judah.  As  Saul  was  a  Benjamite,  the  speech  of  the 
two  men  he  was  to  meet  at  Zelzah  was  to  be  an  indication 
of  the  coming  supremacy  of  'little  Benjamin,  their  ruler.' 

That  Rachel's  tomb  remained  a  well-known  spot  for 
centuries  after  this,  we  know  from  the  prophetic  utterance 
of  Jeremiah  (xxxi.  15),  the  Raraah  mentioned  by  him 
here  not  being  the  same  as  that  of  chapter  xl.  1. 

The  first  Evangelist,  Matthew,  though  a  Galilean, 
could  have  had  no  misgivings  as  to  the  contiguity  of 
Rachel's  tomb  with  Ramah,  and  of  both  with  Bethlehem 
(which  lay  between  them),  as  he  cites  the  verse  of 
Jeremiah  and  connects  it  with  Bethlehem  and  '  all  the 
borders  thereof,'  er-Rdmeh  being  twelve  miles  off  (Matthew 
ii.  16-18).  At  this  time  the  tomb  was  only  a  pyramid 
of  stones  with  a  cave  beneath,  which  was  its  appearance 
so  late  as  the  seventh  century  a.d. 

{h)  As  Saul  went  northward  to  Gibeon  from  Rachel's 
tomb,  he  would  pass  to  the  west  of  Jehus,  even  then 
called  Jerusalem,^  and  was  told  by  Samuel  that  when 
he  came  to  the  Gibeah-of-God  a  certain  thing  would 
happen.  In  Samuel's  mouth  this  name  could  hardly 
apply  to  any  other  place  than  Mizpah  (=  Nehy  Samwzl), 
(at  the  foot  of  which  his  most  direct  path  lay),  as  it 
was  there  that  God  had  so  lately  come  to  the  help  of  his 
people  against  the  Philistine  army.  Its  connection  with 
^  As  shown  by  tlie  Tel  el-Amarna  tablets. 


TABEENACLE    REMOYEB    TO    NOB.       51 

the  subject  of  this  chapter  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  liad 
become  a  hamah  or  high-place,  and  that  a  procession  of 
musicians  coming  from  there  was  joined  by  Saul,  who, 
meeting  them  at  the  *Ir'  enclosure,  accompanied  them 
to  another  high-place,  probably  that  at  Gibeon,  \\  miles 
away.  These  Israelitish  high-places  were  a  copy  of 
heathenism,  being  based  upon  the  material  idea  that 
worshippers  standing  on  them  were  nearer  to  the  seat 
of  the  God  or  gods  than  when  on  lower  ground.  In 
contrast  with  this  it  may  be  noticed  that  the  sites  chosen 
for  the  Tabernacle  were  never  those  of  hill-tops.  Gilgal 
was  on  a  plain,  Shiloh  on  a  gently-rising  slope,  and 
even  Moriah  was  surrounded  by  hills  higher  than  itself. 
Ramah,  as  we  have  seen,  lay  below  the  town  in  which 
Samuel  Kved,  and  Gibeon  may  have  been  on  a  plain. 

In  the  identification  of  er-Rdmeh  of  Judah  with  the 
Ramah  of  Samuel,  we  also  recover  the  *  Arimathea '  of 
Joseph,  the  Sanhedrist,  who  begged  the  body  of  Jesus 
and  laid  it  in  his  own  tomb.  Arimathea  was  still  *  a  city 
of  the  Jews'  (Luke  xxxii.  51)  at  the  time  of  the 
Crucifixion.     It  is  now  quite  deserted. 

7.  The  altar  at  Ramah  was  in  use  when  Saul  was 
privately  informed  of  his  coming  election  as  King. 
A  national  assembly  held  shortly  afterwards,  for  the 
selection  of  a  king,  showed  that  Mizpah  (  =  Neby 
Samicil)  was  the  central  meeting-place  of  the  Tribes; 
while  Samuel's  instruction  to  Saul  to  spend  seven  days 
at  Gilgal  in  preparation  for  the  public  recognition  of 
him   as   God's   vicegerent,  showed   that   the   Tabernacle 


52  THE    TABEHNACLE. 

now  stood  there.  A  great  change  was,  however, 
imminent.  This  was  no  less  than  the  final  abandon- 
ment of  Gilgal  as  the  site  of  the  Tabernacle.  It  were 
vain  to  attempt  any  categorical  reason  for  this  action. 
Not  unlikely  it  was  done  at  Saul's  instigation,  and  as 
a  step  toward  the  attainment  of  a  purpose  which  he, 
later,  carried  out.  Saul's  attitude  toward  the  priesthood 
was  uniformly  one  of  hostility  and  even  contempt.  He 
had  usurped  the  priest's  ofiice  at  the  service  of  his  own 
consecration  (1  Samuel  xiii.  9).  He  had,  as  a  con- 
sequence, alienated  from  himself  the  friendship  of  Samuel, 
whose  life  he  threatened  (1  Samuel  xvi.  2).  More  was  to 
follow. 

The  result,  however,  was  that,  after  the  final  breach 
with  Samuel  (1  Samuel  xv.),  we  next  bear  of  the 
Tabernacle  as  being  at  Nob.  As  is  so  frequently  the 
case  in  the  records  of  those  days,  deeds  that  were 
revolting  to  the  conscience  of  the  writers  are  passed 
over  without  mention.  Doubtless  Saul  found  Gilgal, 
in  the  eastern  limit  of  the  land,  inconvenient  as  a  place 
of  rendezvous  for  the  militia  of  the  people,  and  injurious 
to  the  military  operations  in  which  he  was  constantly 
engaged  (1  Samuel  xiv.  47),  as  his  attendance  was 
sometimes  requisite  there.  It  is  not  until  the  breach 
with  Samuel  had  been  followed  by  that  with  David, 
that  we  find  the  High-priest  Ahimelech  (son  of  the 
Ahitub  who,  forty  years  before  this,  had  been  rescued 
from  the  burning  of  Shiloh)  officiating  at  Nob.  He 
seems  to  have  been  a  man  without  any  real  dignity  of 
character  or  pride  of  office,  just   such  a  one   as   would 


IDENTIFICATION    OF    NOB.  53 

surrender  everything  to  the  hectoring  of  Saul,  of  whom 
he  lived  in  craven  fear.  He  probably  removed  the 
Tabernacle  to  Nob. 

8.  Four  miles  to  the  north  of  Jerusalem,  and  at  the 
distance  of  a  quarter  of  a  mile  to  the  east  of  the  main 
road,  is  a  curiously  knobbed  and  double-topped  hill, 
named  by  the  Arabs  Tell  (or  Tuleil)  el-Ful.  The  crown 
of  this  hill  is  30  feet  higher  than  Mount  Zion,  and 
Jerusalem  can  be  plainly  seen  from  it.  On  its  top  is 
a  large  pyramidal  mound  of  unhewn  stones,  which 
Robinson  supposes  to  have  been  originally  a  square 
tower  of  40  or  50  feet,  and  to  have  been  violently 
thrown  down.  No  other  foundations  are  to  be  seen 
At  the  foot  of  the  hill  are  ancient  substructions,  built 
of  large  unhewn  stones  in  low  massive  walls.  These 
are  on  its  south  side,  and  adjoin  the  great  road. 

If  we  take  the  scriptural  indications  as  to  the  site  ot 
Nob  (=  height),  this  hill  and  these  ruins  fulfil  all  the 
conditions  of  the  case. 

{a)  Nob  was  so  far  regarded  as  belonging  to  Jerusalem, 
as  one  of  its  villages  (thus  involving  its  proximity), 
that  David's  bringing  Goliath's  head  and  sword  to  the 
Tabernacle  at  Nob  was  regarded  as  bringing  them  to 
Jerusalem  (1  Samuel  xvii.  54). 

(6)  A  clearer  indication  as  to  its  situation  is,  however, 
gained  by  the  record  of  the  restoration  towns  and 
villages  in  which  Nob  is  mentioned,  the  name  occurring 
between  those  of  Anathoth  and  Ananiah  (Nehemiah 
xi.    32).     These   two  places    still    bear    practically    the 


U    '  THE    TABERNACLE. 

same  names,  and  their  sites  are  well  known.  In  tlie 
narrow  space  between  Andta  and  Hanina  stands  the  hill 
of  Tell  el'Fulf  which  we  take  to  be  the  ancient  Nob. 

{c)  Another  indication  is  contained  in  Isaiah's  account 
of  Sennacherib's  march  on  Jerusalem,  the  picturesque 
climax  of  which  is,  '  This  very  day  shall  he  halt  at 
Nob ;  he  shaketh  his  hand  at  the  mount  of  the  daughter 
of  Zion,  the  hill  of  Jerusalem'  (Isaiah  x.  28-32).  There 
are  only  two  hills  on  the  north  from  which  the  city  can 
be  seen,  so  as  to  give  reality  to  the  poet's  words.  One 
of  these  is  Nehy  Samwif,  the  other  Tell  el-Fdl.  Like 
Pompey  in  after  centuries,  the  Assyrians  approached 
Jerusalem  from  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  and  not  by 
any  of  its  great  roads.  The  evidences  of  this  are  to 
be  found  in  the  list  of  places  given  in  the  preceding 
context  of  the  verse  in  which  Nob  is  mentioned.  These, 
with  their  modern  equivalents,  are  : — 

(1)  Aith,  .  .  .  now  Khan  Haiydny  1  mile  south- 
east of  et  Tell  (=  Ai),  which  is  one  mile  north  of 
Mich  mash. 

(2)  Migron,  .  .  .  ( =  precipice),  now  Makhruriy 
a  little  east  of  Bethel. 

(3)  Michmash,  .  .  .  modern  village  of  Mukhmds, 
north  of  the  Eastern  Gibeah  (Jeba). 

(4)  '  The  Pass  *  .  .  .  Compare  *  the  pass  of 
Michmash'   (1  Sam.  xiii.  23). 

(5)  Geba,  .  .  .  (=  Jeba),  2  or  3  miles  south  of 
Michmash,  with  the  SuweinU  gorge  between. 

(6)  Ramah,  .  .  .  (=  ^r  i?a?^?),  between  2  and  3  miles 
west  of  Geba  (=  Jeba). 


SENiS^ACHERIB    ON    NOB.  55 

(7)  GIbeali  of  Saul,    .    .    .    =  Gibeon,  now  el- Jib, 
3  miles  to  the  west  of  Raraah  of  Benjamin  (=  er  Rdm). 

(8)  Gallim,    .    .    .     (=  heaps),  birthplace  of  Phalti 
(1  Sam.  XV.  44),  unknown. 

(9)  Laishah,    ...    a   ruin   named  Adasa,   east  of 
Gibeon. 

(10)  Anathoth,    .    .    .    village   of   Andta,    5    miles 
north-east  of  Jerusalem. 

(11)  Madmenah,    .     .    .    (=  dung-heap),  unknown, 
possibly  a  suburb  of  Jerusalem. 

(12)  Gebim,     .     .     .     ( =  the   trenches),  unknown, 
possibly  defensive  works  on  the  north  side  of  Jerusalem. 

The  outstanding  military  facts  of  the  five  verses  in 
which  these  names  occur  are  that  Sennacherib  had  laid 
up  his  baggage  at  Michmash,  the  pass  being  impossible 
for  vehicles,  and  had  moved  on  to  Nob  with  a  part  of  his 
army  (the  main  body  being  at  Geba),  from  the  top  of 
which  he  was  *  on  that  very  day  '  to  shake  his  fist  at 
Jerusalem. 

Mizpah  is  not  mentioned.  It  lay  off  the  line  of  march, 
and  may  have  had  no  settled  population. 

(d)  An  examination  of  the  three  books  of  the  Bible  in 
which  Nob  is  mentioned  leaves  us  no  ground  for  seeing  it 
in  Nebf/  Samwil.  If  Mizpah  be  in  this  way  excluded, 
the  only  other  claimant  to  the  position  is  Tell  el-Ful. 

David  was  30  years  of  age  at  the  time  of  Saul's  death.^ 

'  Saul  was  an  old  man  at  the  time  of  his  death.  Two  lines  of  argument 
lead  to  this  conclusion.  One,  that  his  fourth  son,  Ish-bosheth  (1  Chron.  ix. 
39),  was  40  years  old  when  he  was  set  upon  the  throne  (2  Sam.  ii.  10).     The 


66  THE    TABERNACLE. 

He  was  thus  still  a  j^oung  man  wlien  he  called  at  Nob 
and  obtained  Goliath's  sword.  Shortly  afterwards,  during 
the  lifetime  of  Saul,  the  Tabernacle  was  removed  to  Gibeon. 
During  the  few  years  in  which  it  stood  at  Nob  it  would 
hardly  be  likely  to  have  been  placed  on  the  top  of  the 
hill.  We  have  seen  that  such  situations  were  alien  to  the 
spirit  of  the  new  faith.  Its  place  must  thus  be  sought  at 
the  foot  of  the  hill,  where  are  the  low  massive  walls 
and  ancient  substructions  of  unhewn  stone,  remarked  by 
Robinson.  No  dimensions  of  these  walls  are  available. 
Their  height,  thickness,  and  length  remain  as  yet 
unrecorded,  together  with  the  size  of  their  enclosed 
areas  and  aspect.  With  the  key  of  the  cubit  in  our 
hand  we  may  be  able  to  decide  as  to  their  probable 
origin  and  history,  so  soon  as  the  required  data  are  before 
us.  Then  may  be  expected  to  close  another  chapter  in 
the  elucidation  of  the  memorable  sites  of  the  Holy  I-and. 

9.  The  episode  of  the  High-priest  Ahimelech's  giving 
Goliath's  sword  to  David  at  Nob  is  one  that  was  pregnant 
with  consequences  to  all  the  parties  concerned  in  it.     It 


other,  that  by  the  true  interpretation  of  1  Sam.  xiii.  Saul's  popular  election 
as  king  took  place  one  year  after  his  anointing  by  Samuel,  when  he  became 
king  dej'ure.  Two  years  after  his  election  war  with  the  Philistines  broke  out, 
in  which  Jonathan  greatly  distinguished  himself.  He  could  not  have  been 
less  than  18  years  of  age  at  this  time,  his  father,  Saul,  being  possibly  20 
years  older.  This  was  m  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign,  when  he  was  about 
38  years  of  age.  The  length  of  his  reign  is  nowhere  given,  but  it  was  not 
short.  The  reading  in  the  margin  of  1  Sam.  ix.  2  is  therefore  to  be  preferred, 
in  which  Saul,  at  the  time  of  his  election,  is  spoken  of  as  *  choice '  rather 
than  as  '  young.' 


THE    TABERNACLE    AT    GIBEON.  57 

gave  to  the  tyrant  Saul  the  opportunity  of  carrying  out 
a  half-fulfilled  purpose  which  he  must,  for  a  long  time, 
have  secretly  cherished.  To  learn  what  that  purpose 
was  we  must,  for  a  moment,  look  at  the  relations  in 
which  the  family  of  Saul  stood  to  their  ancestral  city, 
Gibeah-of-Saul,  more  commonly  known  as  Gibeon. 

We  have,  in  the  first  book  of  Chronicles,  genealogies, 
rewritten  after  the  return  from  the  Captivity,  in  which 
the  descent  of  the  two  houses  of  Saul  and  David  are 
minutely  traced. 

vSix  verses  of  chapter  viii.  (vv.  33-38)  trace  the  family 
history  from  Ner,  the  father  of  Kish,  and  grandfather 
of  Saul,  to  those  descendants  of  the  ex-royal  family  who 
returned  from  the  Bab3donish  captivity.  These  particulars 
are  repeated  in  chapter  ix.  (vv.  39-44),  and  are  an 
illustration  of  the  composite  character  of  the  book.  In 
each  of  these  texts  are  verses  preceding  them,  practically 
identic,  in  which  the  family  history  is  given  as  far 
back  as  the  records  went.  They  so  far  supplement  one 
another  as  to  tell  us  that  a  certain  Jeiel,  whose  wife's 
name  was  Maachah,  was  the  '  father  '  of  Gibeon.  This 
joint  genealogy  furnishes  a  line  of  fifteen  generations, 
and  dates  from  some  period  anterior  to  the  elevation 
of  Saul. 

What  is  meant  by  the  *  father '  of  a  city  is  a  position 
which  cannot  be  reproduced — hardly  understood — in  our 
Western  social  life.  The  soil  out  of  which  the  office 
grew  was  the  patriarchal  one,  by  which  the  family,  the 
sept,  and  the  clan  were  governed  by  its  eldest  and  most 
honoured  member.      When   the  change  from  a  pastoral 


58  THE    TABERNACLE. 

life  into  that  of  an  agricultural  one  was  complete,  and 
communities  were  formed  in  villages,  towns,  and  cities, 
the  same  social  instincts  prevailed,  and  the  '  father '  of 
the  little  group  of  households  became  an  hereditary 
office,  transmitted  from  father  to  son.^  Thus  the  office 
of  'father,'  in  the  once  Gibeonite  town  of  Gibeah,  was 
retained  in  the  family  of  Matri,  and  descended  to  Saul. 
The  family  inheritance  was  at  Zela,  in  the  county 
of  Benjamin,  where  also  was  the  family  sepulchre 
(2  Samuel  xxi.  14).  Zela  is  mentioned  in  Joshua  xviii. 
28,  next  to  Eleph  (=  Lifta),  and  was  probably  not  far 
from  Gibeon,  but  no  trace  of  it  has  been  found. 

Holding  this  local  honour  in  the  family,  and  elected 
King  over  all  Israel,  Saul  determined  to  make  Gibeon 
the  seat  of  government  for  the  country  and  the  spiritual 
capital  of  the  new  kingdom.  To  this  end  the  transfer 
of  the  Tabernacle  from  Gilgal  was  one  step.  The  erection 
of  Samuel's  altar  at  Ramah  was  another,  as  it  withdrew 
a  large  amount  of  influence  from  the  recognised  place 
of  sacrifice  for  the  twelve  tribes.  The  death  of  Samuel 
about  this  time  (1  Samuel  xxv.  1),  and  the  incident  of 
the  sword  of  Goliath,  gave  Saul  the  opportunity  he  had 
long  waited  for.  Sending  for  Ahimelech,  the  High-priest, 
and  all  the  priests  that  were  in  Nob,  to  some  height 
adjoining  Gibeon,  he  had  them  foully  murdered  before 
his  eyes.     He  did  not  fear  to  lift  up  his  hand  upon  the 

^  The  title,  however,  would  seem  to  have  been  retained  in  the  records  only 
to  those  fathers  who  were  the  first  of  their  line,  or  the  founders  of  cities. 
In  such  cases  as  those  of  1  Chron.  ii.  42-52  and  iv.  4-5,  in  which 
Canaanite  towns  are  mentioned,  the  '  father '  of  each  is  to  he  understood  of  its 
Jirst  ruler  or  patriarch. 


MASSACRE    OF    THE    GIBEONITES.        59 

Lord's  anointed.  This  was  but  a  part  of  his  crime.  He 
sent  his  executioners  to  Nob,  and  there  destroyed  all  the 
dedicated  servants  of  the  Tabernacle,  Abiathar  alone,  as 
a  priest,  being  allowed  to  escape. 

At  the  same  time  he  began  a  war  of  general  ex- 
termination against  the  Gibeonite  hewers  of  wood  and 
drawers  of  water  for  the  Tabernacle.  We  catch  a  glimpse 
of  this  act  of  uncalled-for  ferocity  in  the  statement  that 
the  Beerothites  fled  to  Gittaim  (2  Samuel  iv.  3).  Beeroth 
was  one  of  the  four  Hivite  cities  that  drew  Joshua  into 
a  treaty  of  peace,  and  by  the  destruction  of  all  their 
heathen  inhabitants  Saul  hoped  to  purge  Gibeon  and 
the  land  of  its  foreign  element,  and  to  secure  around 
the  Tabernacle,  when  re-erected,  only  men  of  the  race 
of  Israel  (2  Samuel  xxi.  2,  5).  We  know  how  this 
series  of  monstrous  crimes  was  expiated  in  the  reign 
of  David,  by  the  death  of  seven  of  Saul's  descendants, 
who  were  hanged  in  Gibeah-of-Saul,  i.e.   Gibeon. 

Before  that  day  came,  however,  the  Tabernacle  was 
removed  to  Gibeon,  and  the  policy  of  blood  and  sacrilege 
seemed  to  prosper. 

10.  In  the  original  grant  of  fourteen  cities  to  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin,  three  had  different  forms  of  the  same  name 
(Joshua  xviii.  21-28),  two  of  which  were  priestly  cities. 
These  are  given  as  Geba,  Gibeon,  and  Gibeath,  but  their 
sites  have  been  recovered,  and  they  may  be  distinguished 
as  Jibia,  the  place  of  the  northern  Gibeah ;  Jeba,  the 
site  of  the  eastern  Gibeah ;  and  el- Jib,  the  village  of  the 
southern  Gibeah,  or  Gibeon. 


60  THE   TABERNACLE. 

The  former  city  of  the  Hivites  was  not  only  the  largest 
of  the  three,  but  played  a  more  prominent  part  in  the 
history  of  the  country  than  either  *  Gibeah  of  Benjamin  ' 
(=  Jeha)  or  the  Gibeah  lying  in  the  north  angle  of  the 
territory  of  Benjamin,  a  few  miles  south  of  Shiloh,^  now 
known  as  Jibia.  In  addition  to  the  confusion  caused  by 
this  similarity  of  names,  the  word  Gibeah  is  often  used 
in  the  English  Bible  (both  versions)  as  an  appellative, 
and  not  as  a  proper  name,  e.g.,  Abinadab  is  said  to  have 
lived  in  the  Gibeah  of  Kirjath-Jearim  (2  Samuel  vi.  3), 
and  Saul  is  described  as  sitting  in  Gibeah,  under  the 
tree  in  Ramah  (1  Samuel  xxii.  6). 

The  identity  of  the  village  of  el-Jih  with  the  site 
of  Gibeon  is  practically  beyond  dispute.  *  The  pool  of 
Gibeon*  (2  Samuel  ii.  13)  and  *  the  great  waters  that 
are  in  Gibeon  *  (Jeremiah  xli.  11)  are  still  represented 
by  a  large  stone  tank  or  reservoir,  100  x  120  feet, 
supplied  by  a  spring  which  rises  in  a  cave  higher  up. 
A  secret  way  led  down  from  the  town  to  the  spring, 
as  at  Jerusalem. 

The  village  stands  on  the  more  northerly  of  two 
mamelons  (2,572  feet)  six  miles  from  Jerusalem  and  seven 
from  Bethel.  Its  strategic  value  was  great,  as  it  lay  on 
the  watershed  of  the  central  plateau,  across  which,  passing 
its  northern  foot,  ran  the  road  which  connects  the  pass 
of  Bethhoron  on  the  west  with  that  of  Michmash  on  the 
east.  El- Jib  is  built  upon  an  isolated  oblong  hill  standing 
in  a  plain  or  basin  of  great  fertility.     The  northern  end 

^  Hence  we  read  that  in  the  reign  of  Josiah  the  kingdom  of  Judah 
extended  '  from  Geba  to  Beersheba '  (2  Kings  xxiii.  8). 


GIBEON    AS    A    CAPITAL.  61 

of  the  hill  is  covered  with  old  massive  ruins,  which  have 
fallen  down  in  every  direction,  and  in  which  the  villagers 
now  live.  Across  the  plain  to  the  south  is  the  lofty 
ridge  of  Nehij  Samidl. 

Gibeon  was  one  of  four  towns  in  the  division  of 
Benjamin  given  as  residences  for  the  sons  of  Aaron 
(Joshua  xxi.  17).  It  was  thus  already  inhabited  by 
priests,  and  this,  added  to  its  other  advantages,  made  it, 
humanly  speaking,  a  not  unsuitable  place  for  the  capital 
of  the  new  kingdom.  Its  situation  is  certainly  more 
central  than  that  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  soil  of  the 
adjoining  territory  more  fertile  than  the  rocky  slopes  of 
Olivet  and  Moriah  or  the  valleys  that  lie  around  them. 

In  the  total  destruction  of  the  hamlet  at  Nob  the 
Tabernacle  was  reserved.  Its  preservation  was  necessary 
to  the  plans  of  the  King.  It  is  in  entire  consonance  with 
the  habits  and  traditions  of  Hebrew  historiographers 
that  an  act  so  founded  in  self-will  and  ambition  as  the 
transfer  of  the  altar  and  tabernacle  to  Gibeon,  with  all  its 
brutal  accompaniments,  should  be  unrecorded  by  them. 
Not  in  any  way  to  refer  to  it  or  to  notice  its  existence, 
was  at  once  the  most  dignified  censure  of  Saul,  and  the 
most  complete  repudiation  of  his  action.^  Such  we  find 
to  be  the  case  throughout  the  long  and  devout  reign  of 
David.  Not  until  his  death  and  Solomon's  accession  do 
we   find   any   specific   reference   to   the   erection   of  the 

1  The  verdict  of  histor}'  was  spoken  by  the  prophet  Hosea,  who  wrote 
a  few  years  before  the  fall  of  Samaria.  He  traces  the  moral  corruption  of 
the  northern  kingdom  to  its  source  at  Gibeon  :  '  They  have  deeply  corrupted 
themselves  as  in  the  days  of  Gibeah  ....  0  Israel,  thou  hast  sinned  fi-om 
the  days  of  Gibeah.     There  have  they  continued '  (Hosea  ix.  9  and  x.  9). 


62  THE    TABERNACLE. 

Tabernacle  at  Gibeon.  And  the  record  is  then  so  full 
and  minute  that  we  at  once  feel  it  to  be  the  breaking 
of  a  long  and  premeditated  silence  (1  Kings  iii.  4). 
A  single  line  in  the  history  of  David's  officers  of  state 
records  that  Zadok,  of  the  senior  line  of  Eleazar,  had  been 
placed  in  charge  of  the  Tabernacle  at  Gibeon,  doubtless 
by  Saul,  and  this  entry  shows  that  David  did  not  kindle 
the  flames  of  religious  strife  by  repudiating  Saul's  action, 
but  recognised  it  as  a  thing  done,  with  which  he  did  not 
wish  to  interfere  (2  Samuel  xx.  25). 

No  remains  of  buildings  at  el- Jib  have  been  discovered, 
such  as  those  at  er-Rdmeh  and  Tell  el-Ful,  which  may  be 
attributed  to  the  Tabernacle  as  its  outer  walls. 

A  suggestion  may  be  hazarded  that  the  Tabernacle 
stood  on  the  west  side  of  el- Jib y  where,  in  the  plain, 
is  a  large  neglected  well,  at  a  distance  of  about  a  mile 
from  the  city.  It  is  called  Bir  el-Ozeiz,  and  is  19  feet^ 
in  diameter  and  nearly  filled  up  with  earth,  being  only 
8  feet  to  the  water,  which  also  is  very  scanty  (Robinson's 
Biblical  Researches,  vol.  i.  p.  455;  vol.  ii.  p.  256). 

So  large  a  work  as  the  digging  of  this  well  would  not 
have  been  undertaken  without  some  adequate  motive. 
It  is  not  used  for  purposes  of  agriculture,  and  may 
possibly  have  once  supplied  an  adjoining  tabernacle  with 
water. 


1  This  must  be  a  printer's  error  for  9  feet.  I  judge  the  well  to  have  about 
the  same  diameter  as  the  well  at  Eumet.  It  has  lately  been  cleaned  out  and 
the  upper  wall  rebuilt,  so  that  no  stress  can  be  laid  upon  any  diameter  that  is 
not  taken  below  the  level  of  the  water.  In  February,  1904,  the  well  was 
overflowing,  and  no  agricultural  use  was  being  made  of  the  water,  which  was 
running  to  waste. 


TABEENACLE    SITE    AT    GIBEON.         63 

But  further  investigation  is  necessary,  though  it  may 
be  remarked  that  the  situation  is  suitable  to  the  description 
that  the  Gibeonites  hanged  Saul's  seven  descendants  *  in 
the  mountain  before  the  Lord  '  ^  (2  Samuel  xxi.  9) ;  if 
by  this  we  are  to  understand  the  southern  Mamelon,  on 
which  there  are  no  ruins,  and  which  is  to  the  east  of 
the  well. 

11.  If,  however,  David  never  worshipped  in  person  at 
the  Tabernacle  of  Gibeon,  and  did  no  more  than  officially 
recognise  the  high  standing  of  Zadok  as  one  of  two 
officiating  High-priests,^  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  the 
difficult  ecclesiastical  questions  of  the  hour  did  not  re- 
ceive consideration  from  him,  and  some  kind  of  solution. 
Whatever  the  treatment  he  adopted,  we  may  be  sure  that 
it  was  at  once  tender  and  cautious,  and  in  contrast  to  the 
high-handed  action  of  Saul,  the  apostate  King  of  Israel. 
That  it  was  not  sufficiently  reverential  we  shall  see. 


1  The  mention  of  Geba  (Gibeon)  in  1  Chron.  viii.  6  is  suggestive,  the 
more  so  as  the  Chaldee  Targum  adds  to  Manahath  the  words  '  In  the  land 
of  Edom.' 

Considering  how  hostile  were  the  relations  of  Benjamin  and  Judah  after 
the  death  of  Saul  (2  Samuel  iii.  1),  and  the  fact  that  at  David's  election  aa 
king  over  all  the  tribes  the  greater  part  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  kept  their 
allegiance  to  the  house  of  Saul  (I  Chron.  xii.  29),  it  is  not  improbable  that 
the  migration  ('  captivity')  of  a  number  of  malcontent  Benjamites,  under  the 
guidance  of  Naaraan,  Ahijah,  and  Gera,  heads  of  fathers'  houses  in  Gibeon, 
to  Mahanath  ( =  resting-place)  in  Edom,  took  place  at  this  time. 

At  the  restoration  the  return  of  some  of  their  descendants  is  noted  in 
I  Chron.  viii.  8-12. 

'  The  resolution  to  build  at  Jerusalem  a  new  tent  and  Tabernacle  for  the 
Ark,  rather  than  to  replace  it  in  its  old  shrine  at  Gibeon,  is  the  clearest 
possible  proof  of  the  adoption  of  this  line  of  conduct. 


64  THE    TABEENACLE, 

On  David's  election  as  King  over  all  the  Tribes,  and 
his  capture  of  the  fortress  of  Jehus — the  Uru-salifn  of 
the  Amarna  tablets, — one  of  his  first  civic  activities  was 
the  building  of  a  palace  for  himself.  With  characteristic 
simplicity  of  language  this  is  always  called  '  a  house/ 
though  built  by  Phoenician  masons  and  carpenters,  and 
fitted  with  cedar-wood  (2  Sam.  v.  11,  and  1  Chron.  xv.  1). 

Questions  of  the  situation  of  this  house,  and  even  of  the 
locality  of  the  city  of  David,  belong  to  the  topography  of 
Jerusalem,  and  will  be  treated  under  that  head.  In  the 
meantime  it  is  enough  to  state  the  conclusions  arrived 
at,  which  are  that  the  Ophel  (=  swelling)  spur  is  what 
should  be  known  as  the  city  of  David,  and  that  David's 
house  stood  on  its  highest  point,  and  just  below  the  south 
wall  of  the  Haram  area.  It  was  reached  by  a  gate  and 
narrow  street,  running  east  and  west,  from  the  place  of 
the  Horse  Gate,  which  stood  at  the  south-west  corner 
of  Mount  Moriah.  The  elevated  situation  of  David's 
palace  is  implied  both  in  the  Bathsheba  incident,  and  in 
the  view  of  the  procession  of  the  ark  Michal  had  from 
one  of  its  windows. 

Near  to,  possibly  adjoining,  the  King's  house,  and 
farther  to  the  west,  was  a  place  '  prepared,'  i.e.  levelled, 
for  the  ark  of  God,  and  a  tent,  in  exact  imitation  of  that 
at  Gibeon,  was  pitched  upon  it  (1  Chron.  xv.  1). 

That  the  site  of  the  new  Tabernacle  adjoined  that  of 
the  palace  to  which  Solomon  brought  his  Egyptian  wife, 
we  see  in  the  curious  reason  given  by  him  for  removing 
her  to  the  porch  built  for  her  on  Mount  Moriah.  *  My 
wife,'  said  he,   *  shall  not  dwell  in  the  house  of  David, 


A    SECO]N"D    TABER]^ACLE.  65 

King  of  Israel,  because  the  places  are  holy  whereunto  the 
ark  of  the  Lord  hath  come  '  (2  Chron.  viii.  11). 

It  is  probable  that  David's  house  was  not  of  large 
size,  and  that  the  tent  of  the  Tabernacle  stood  in  a  very 
limited,  though  enclosed,  area  (1  Kings  viii.  1). 

The  language  of  1  Kings  iii.  4,  that  *at  Gibeon  was 
the  great  high  place,'  is  not  only  singular  in  appropriating 
to  the  Tabernacle  a  description  commonly  used  of  un- 
authorized places  of  sacrifice,  but  it  also  involves  the  idea 
of  there  having  been  another  sanctioned  high-place  of 
inferior  age  and  fewer  associations.  That  when  the  golden 
ark  of  the  Covenant  arrived  at  Jerusalem  they  offered  burnt- 
ofierings  and  peace-offerings  before  God  (1  Chron.  xvi.  1), 
leaves  no  room  for  doubt  as  to  whether  David's  tabernacle 
in  Jerusalem  was  furnished  with  an  altar  or  not.  These 
offerings  could  have  been  made  only  at  a  properly- 
equipped  tabernacle,  before  which  an  altar  stood  ;  though 
it  is  probable  that  up  to  this  time  the  public  sacrifices, 
offered  daily,  monthly,  and  yearly,  on  behalf  of  the  whole 
nation,  were  slain  at  Gibeon,  and  offered  by  Zadok. 

The  new  tent  and  its  altar  being  ready  for  occupation 
and  use,  arrangements  were  made  for  bringing  into  it  the 
Ark  of  the  Covenant,  which  had,  for  nearly  a  century  of 
years,^  lain  in  its  room  at  Kirjath-Jearim,  with  no  High- 
priest  in  attendance  upon  it. 


^  This  approximate  total  is  thus  made  up :  (1)  Samuel's  judgeship,  from 
the  loss  of  the  ark  to  the  election  of  Saul,  40  years  ;  (2)  length  of  Saul's 
reign,  during  the  whole  of  which  the  ark  was  in  captivity,  ahout  20  years  ; 
(3)  David's  reign  of  seven  years  at  Hehron,  and  portion  of  reign  in  Jerusalem, 
10  to  15  years. 


66  THE    TABERNACLE. 

It  was  determined  to  have  a  great  procession  of  many 
thousands,  gathered  from  all  places  between  the  extremes 
of  Wady-el'AHsh  and  the  Valley  of  the  Orontes.  In 
the  record  of  this  assemblage  no  mention  is  made  of 
priests  or  Levites.     Psalm  cxxxii.  was  then  composed. 

The  idea  was  that  as  the  ark  had  been  lost  in  battle,  and 
its  absence  from  the  Tabernacle  was  thus  a  national  act, 
so  the  whole  nation,  by  its  representatives,  should  escort 
it  to  Jerusalem,  and  that  the  soldiery  and  civilians  should 
there  deliver  it  to  the  priests,  to  be  put  into  its  place  in 
the  midst  of  the  Tabernacle.  The  procession  was  formed 
at  Kirjath-Jearim,  with  many  musical  instruments,  and 
as  the  ark  had  been  restored  by  the  Philistines  on  a  new 
cart  drawn  by  two  milch  kine,  so  it  was  now  put  upon 
a  new  cart  and  placed  in  the  care  of  two  of  the  sons  of 
Abinadab,  one  of  whom  led  the  oxen  and  the  other  drove 
the  cart.  As  Kirjath-Jearim  was  neither  a  priestly  nor 
a  Levitical  city,  it  is  probable  that  Abinadab  and  his  sons 
were  laymen.  They  are  nowhere  given  any  sacred  rank, 
nor  is  any  blessing  attached  to  their  long  care  of  the  ark. 

The  policy  pursued,  that  of  following  the  Philistine 
precedent  of  removing  the  ark,  and  of  making  its 
restoration  an  act  of  national  glorification,  was  a  fatal 
one.  Ilzza  was  smitten  to  death  for  touching  the  ark 
when  the  oxen  were  restive.  The  procession  was  at  once 
arrested.  David,  who  was  present,  as  one  of  the  players 
upon  harps,  on  the  instant  gave  orders  to  abandon  the 
progress. 

The  ark  was  reverently  carried  by  Levites  into  the 
house  of  one  of  their  number  who  lived  in  a  neighbouring 


BISE    OF    OBED-EDOM.  67 

village,^   and  Israel  dispersed  with  a  new  sense   of  the 

reality  of  the  Mosaic  Law,  and  of  the  penalties  following 

on  those  who  disobeyed  it. 

Obed-Edom,  into  whose  house  the  ark   was  received, 

was   a   Kohathite   Levite    of  the   family  of  Korah,    the 

Kohathites  being  the  highest  in  rank  of  all  the  Levites, 

Aaron   and   Moses   belonging   to   their   stock.      He  was 

a  resident  of  Gittaim  (=  two  winepresses),  a  village  that 

stood  beside  the  road,  somewhere  in  the  ten  miles  that 

separated   Kirjath-Jearim    and  Jerusalem.      Its  site  has 

not  been  recovered,   though  it  is  mentioned  in  David's 

time  (2  Samuel  iv.  3),  and  again   after  the  restoration 

(Nehemiah  xi.  33).      From  the  name  of  his  home,  and 

from  the  prominence  into  which  the  events  of  this  day 

brought  him,  he  came  to  be  known  as  Obed-Edom  the 

Gittite.     The  ark  remained  in  his  care  for  the  space  of 

three  months,  during  which  time  we  are  told  the  Lord 

blessed  him.     The  nature   of  the  blessing  may  be  seen 

in  the  names  of  the  eight  sons  (1  Chron.  xxvi.  4-5)  who 

were   successively  born  to   him,   and  whose  descendants 

became  principal  members   of  the  Temple  guard.      Till 

then  he  evidently  had  no  son.      The  fact  of  these  sons 

having  been  born,  and  having  grown  to  early  manhood 

subsequent  to  the  removal  of  the  ark  to  Jerusalem,  is  one 

of  many  indications  of  the  time  which  elapsed  between 

different  events  recorded  in   the  text,  and  which  stand 

adjacent  to  one  another. 

^  A  number  of  the  Tabernacle  Nethinim  were  at  this  time  living  in  this 
village  (2  Samuel  iv.  3).  As  they  had  fled  from  the  massacre  by  Saul,  it  is 
probable  that  it  lay  outside  the  boundaries  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  The 
text  implies  this. 


68  THE   TABERNACLE. 

12.  During  these  three  months  great  preparations  were 
made  for  the  further  removal  of  the  ark  with  all  fitting 
solemnity  and  honour.  The  ritual  of  the  Law  was  studied 
and  minutely  followed.  Both  the  High  -  priests  were 
ordered  to  be  in  attendance,  that  they  might  wrap  up 
the  ark  in  the  inner  veil  of  the  sanctuary,  as  prescribed 
in  Numbers  iv.  5-6,  and  place  its  staves  in  position. 
Neither  priests  nor  Levites  were  allowed  to  touch  the 
ark,  or  to  look  upon  it  when  uncovered.  The  Kohathites 
then  carried  it,  the  ends  of  the  staves  resting  upon  their 
shoulders.  For  this  purpose  120  attended  the  procession 
from  Gittaim ;  other  Levites  to  the  number  of  742  attended 
as  musicians.  The  sons,  i.e.  the  associates,  of  Jeduthun 
who  were  Merarites,  had  harps  and  other  instruments 
of  percussion.  The  sons  of  Heman,  the  grandson  of 
Samuel,  and  so  Kohathites  (1  Chron.  vL  33),  bore 
trumpets  and  other  wind  instruments.  The  sons  of  Asaph 
(Gershonites)  were  singers.  The  members  of  these  three 
guilds  of  music  were  under  a  conductor  named  Chenaniah, 
chief  of  the  Levites,  who  instructed  about  the  carrying 
of  the  ark,  because  he  was  skilful  (1  Chron.  xv.  22). 
Some  of  the  instruments  were  set  to  Alamoth  and  others 
to  the  Sheminith.  It  is  interesting  to  know  that  the 
musical  octave  was  in  use  in  those  early  times,  of  which 
the  superscriptions  of  Psalms  xlvi.  and  vi.  are  memorials. 

When  the  procession  moved  ofi",  seven  priests,  robed  in 
linen  garments  and  blowing  silver  trumpets,  immediately 
preceding  it,  and  it  was  seen  that  no  disaster  occurred, 
but  that  God  accepted  the  services  of  the  porter-Levites, 
sacrifices   were    offered    by   the    roadside.      With    great 


AEK    BROUGHT    TO    JERUSALEM.  69 

rejoicings  tlie  ark  was  carried  to  Jerusalem  (Obed-Edoru 
and  Jehiah  being  in  special  attendance  upon  it),  and 
set  in  its  place  in  the  Holy  of  Holies  within  the  new 
Tabernacle  which  had  been  built  for  it  in  the  city  of 
David.  Sacrifices  in  great  number  were  then  offered 
on  the  altar  before  it,  and  the  day  closed  with  royal 
gifts  of  bread  and  raisins  and  wine  to  every  adult — the 
flesh  of  the  peace-offerings  being  common  to  all. 

We  have  in  the  16th  chapter  of  1  Chronicles  the 
official  setting  of  the  Psalm  which  David  composed  for 
this  great  occasion.  And  in  Psalms  cv.  and  xcvi.  we 
have  the  same  poem  as  it  was  divided  into  parts  and 
amended  for  use  in  the  Temple  worship.  Besides  these 
memorials  of  that  day,  we  have  in  Psalms  xv.  and  xxiv. 
two  other  lyrics  which  were  written  with  direct  reference 
to  the  death  of  Uzza,  but  their  tone  of  sadness  and  query 
does  not  comport  so  well  with  the  day  of  rejoicing  as 
with  the  period  of  anxiety  which  immediately  preceded  it. 

13.  There  were  now,  and  for  several  years,  two  fully 
equipped  Tabernacles  in  Israel.  That  at  Gibeon  was 
presided  over  by  the  representatives  of  the  elder  line 
of  Aaron  and  had  as  its  distinctive  glory  the  original 
Tabernacle  and  Altar  made  by  Moses.  That  at  Jerusalem 
was  distinguished  by  having  the  original  Ark  and  Mercy- 
Seat  and  the  two  tables  of  the  Law,  and  was  attended 
by  the  heir  of  the  younger  line  of  Aaron's  descendants. 

Both  were  under  the  protection  and  support  of  the 
King,  as  supreme  ruler  in  Church  and  State — subject 
only  to  the  theocratic  idea  under  which  the  nation  was 


70  THE    TABERNACLE. 

called  into  existence.  With  consummate  kingcraft 
David  determined  upon  doing  nothing  which  should 
divide  Israel  into  two  hostile  camps  of  worshippers. 
The  younger  brothers  and  sons  of  each  High- priest 
being  ordinary  priests,  and  not  High-priests,  and  the 
genealogies  being  carefully  kept,  no  difficulty  arose  in 
surrounding  each  of  the  two  heads  of  the  sub-clans  with 
a  number  of  associate-priests.  They  would  naturally 
group  themselves  around  the  several  princes  of  their 
family  at  Gibeon  and  at  Jerusalem.  The  danger  of 
schism  in  such  an  arrangement  was  one  which  David 
took  an  early  opportunity  of  correcting,  as  we  shall  see. 
Bat  at  the  first  this  is  how  the  two  altars  were  served, 
so  far  as  sacrificing  priests  were  needed. 

With  Levites  the  case  was  different.  The  three  clans 
of  these  were  divided  by  David's  authority  immediately 
on  the  establishment  of  regular  worship  in  Jerusalem. 

Asaph  and  all  the  Gershonites  (1  Chron,  vi.  39-43) 
ministered  before  the  ark  continuallj^,  by  turns,  as 
every  day's  work  required,  either  as  musicians  or  as 
attendants  on  the  slaughterers  of  sacrificial  animals.^ 
Obed-Edom  the  Gittite,  with  sixty-seven  of  his  brethren, 
with  another  Obed-Edom,  a  son  of  Jeduthun,  and 
Hosah,  another  Merarite,  in  all  seventy  persons,  or  ten 

*  At  the  reopening  of  the  Temple  on  the  accession  of  Hezekiah,  the  priests 
were  too  few  to  flay  the  sacrifices.  They  were  therefore  helped,  in  this  part 
of  the  work,  by  the  Leyites  (2  Chron.  xxix.  34).  This  passage  is  therefore 
against  the  view  that  the  Levites  up  to  this  period  slaughtered  the  sacrificial 
animals,  as,  when  needed,  they  only  assisted  to  flay  them.  But  in  the 
amended  rules  of  Ezekiel  they  were  to  be  allowed  to  kill  the  sacrifices  for  the 
people,  but  not  more  directly  to  attend  upon  the  altar  (Ezekiel  xUy.  10-14). 


PUBLIC    WOESHIP    REOEGANIZED.        71 

per  diem  for  every  week,  were  appointed  to  be  door- 
keepers of  the  Tabernacle  in  Jerusalem.  The  staff  was 
now  complete.  Priests,  Levites,  singers,  and  doorkeepers 
were  in  their  places,  and  chief  amongst  them  was  Asaph, 
the  writer  of  Psalms  1.  and  Ixxiii.-lxxvii.  That  Asaph 
was  the  writer  of  certain  Psalms  is  affirmed  in  2  Chron. 
xxix.  30. 

The  remaining  Levites  of  the  sub-clans  of  Heman 
and  Jeduthun  (Kohathites  and  Merarites)  were  in  the 
choir,  or  assistants  to  the  slaughterers  in  the  shambles,^ 
or  at  the  gates  of  the  Tabernacle  of  the  Lord  that  was 
at  Gibeon  (1  Chron.  xvi.  39-42).  From  the  terms  in 
which  this  arrangement  of  Levites  is  recorded  it  would 
appear  that  the  service  of  song  in  the  House  of  the 
Lord  that  was  at  Jerusalem  was,  with  the  exception  of 
the  priests'  trumpets,  purely  vocal,  and  that  at  Gibeon 
it  was  largely,  if  not  wholly,  instrumental.  This  is 
what  might  have  been  anticipated  when  we  read  that, 
at  the  progress  from  Gittaim,  '  On  that  day  did  David 
first  ordain  to  give  thanks  unto  the  Lord  by  the  hand 
of  Asaph  and  his  brethren'  (1  Chron.  xvi.  7).  The 
precedent  then  established  was  retained  by  the  same 
authorities,  David  and  Asaph,  in  the  worship  which 
daily  rose  from  the  city  of  David.  Devotional  words 
set  to  music  were  now  first  introduced  into  the  Church 
by  the  poet-king  and  the  psalmist-singer.  The  older 
and  more  conservative  method  of  musical  worship  by 
instruments  was  naturally  retained  at  Gibeon.  This  was 
in  harmony  with  the  law  of  Numbers  x.  10.  Such  an 
1  See  note  on  p.  70. 


72  THE   TABERNACLE. 

innovation  as  was  in  use  in  Ophel  not  only  rendered 
the  service  of  the  House  of  God  more  intelligently- 
devout,  it  also  called  for  such  psalms  and  hymns  and 
spiritual  songs  as  we  have  in  the  body  of  the  Psalter, 
and  has  thus  been  an  unspeakable  blessing  to  the  Church 
in  all  subsequent  ages. 

The  genealogy  of  the  three  chiefs  of  the  two  choirs, 
with  Asaph  standing  on  the  right  of  Heman,  and  Ethan 
(  =  Jeduthun)  on  his  left,  is  given  in  1  Chron.  vi. 
16-48,  it  being  stated  that  their  appointments  were 
merely  provisional  '  until  Solomon  had  built  the  House 
of  the  Lord  in  Jerusalem '  (verse  32).  The  '  tabernacle 
of  the  tent  of  meeting '  is,  however,  spoken  of  as  one, 
though  in  two  parts,  the  representatives  of  the  whole 
body  of  musicians  being  present  at  the  recognition 
meeting.  In  chapter  xvi.  37-42,  their  separation  into 
two  choirs  is  recorded,  with  their  constituents,  as  already 
noted. 

14.  It  is  to  be  imagined  that  the  removal  of  the  ark  to 
Jerusalem,  and  the  inauguration  of  the  Tabernacle-service 
there,  took  place  about  the  middle  of  David's  reign  of 
forty  years.  The  true  sequence  of  events  is,  however, 
of  more  importance  than  an  exact  chronology  of  any  one 
of  them,  and  the  next  development  bearing  upon  our 
subject  is  that  of  the  acquirement  of  a  site  for  the  future 
temple,  and  its  occupation  by  an  altar. 

This  took  place  in  connection  with  David's  census  of 
the  people,  a  matter  which  the  Law,  as  we  have  it, 
sanctions,  though  so  shrewd  a  man  as  Joab  knew  that  it 


THEOPH^VNY    ON    MORIAH.  73 

would  be  a  cause  of  guilt  to  Israel;  the  reason  being 
that  the  half-shekel  of  atonement-money  for  each  male 
above  20  years  of  age  was  not  proposed  to  be  collected, 
according  to  the  law  of  Exodus  xxx.  11-16.  The  penalty 
for  not  doing  so  was  to  be  an  outbreak  of  the  plague. 
The  sequel  of  the  census  taken  by  Joab  is  well  known. 
It  is,  however,  worthy  of  notice  that  the  command 
to  build  an  altar  to  Jehovah  in  the  threshing-floor 
of  Oman  the  Jebusite  was  of  Divine  origin,  and  came 
through  the  prophet  Gad  (1  Chron.  xxi.  18).  This  com- 
mand was  at  once  obeyed,  and  David  himself  went  to 
effect  the  purchase.  It  is  a  point  of  capital  urgency  to 
show  that  the  threshing-floor  (as  might  be  anticipated) 
lay  outside  the  circuit  of  the  city  wall  as  it  then  stood. 
Evidence  on  this  behalf  is  reserved  until  it  can  be  more 
fully  dealt  with  in  the  topography  of  Jerusalem.  It  is 
there  inferred  that  the  original  north  wall  of  the  city  of 
David  ran  diagonally  across  what  is  now  known  as  the 
Haram  area,  cutting  off  its  south-west  corner,  and  leaving 
the  site  of  the  Sakhrah  Stone  outside  the  fortification. 

To  this  spot  David  came,  buying  the  threshing  instru- 
ment and  oxen  for  fifty  silver  shekels,^  and  the  large  site 
of  ground,  probably  the  whole  farm,  for  600  shekels  of 
gold.^  As  soon  as  the  purchase  was  completed,  David 
built  there  an  altar  to  Jehovah,  and  offered  the  two  oxen 
as  a  burnt- sacrifice,  on  which  fell  the  fire  of  Heaven. 


1  At  3s.  id.,  about  £8  10s. 

-  As  the  ratio  in  value  of  silver  and  gold  in  early  times  was  that  of  13  :  40, 
a  gold  shekel  of  the  same  weight  as  one  of  silver  would  be  valued  at  about 
10s.    Hence  600  such  =  £300. 


74  THE    TABERNACLE. 

When  we  remember  that  every  Jewish  altar  was  placed 
upon  a  base  of  either  sods  or  unhewn  stone,  by  which  the 
site  was  at  once  raised  and  levelled,  and  that  the  brasen 
altar  was,  in  every  case,  a  small  moveable  box,  with  an 
interior  grating,  it  is  hardly  possible  to  avoid  the  con- 
clusion that  the  actual  altar  then  used  for  the  burnt- 
sacrifice  was  that  which  had  stood  before  the  Tabernacle 
in  the  cit}'  of  David.  It  was  fitted  with  rings  and  staves 
for  removal,  being  doubtless  modelled  after  that  con- 
structed by  Bezalel  in  the  wilderness.  This  supposition 
receives  support  from  the  fact  that  all  the  proceedings  of 
that  day  were  hastily  carried  out,  on  account  of  the 
plague  then  raging,  and  which  prevented  David's  going 
to  Gibeon  (1  Chron.  xxi.  29).  To  suppose  that  a  delay  of 
several  days  would  have  followed,  while  a  new  altar, 
covered  with  plates  of  brass,  was  being  constructed,  is  to 
violate  all  the  probabilities  of  the  case. 

On  the  miraculous  proof  of  the  acceptance  of  his 
sacrifice,  David  emphatically  said,  in  the  presence  of  the 
High-priest  and  other  sacrificial  attendants,  '  This  is  the 
House  of  Jehovah,  and  This  is  the  altar  of  burnt-offering 
for  Israel.' 

It  is  in  harmony  with  Eastern  habits  of  thought  and 
conduct  that  a  spot  consecrated  by  a  Theophany  should 
at  once  supersede  any  other  in  its  neighbourhood  which 
had  hitherto  been  used  for  sacrifice,  and  was  not  so 
highly  credentialled  (Ex.  iii.  5;  Josh.  v.  15).  The  altar 
at  Gibeon,  till  the  reign  of  Solomon,  continued  to  smoke 
with  victims,  but  it  is  against  the  evidence  to  suppose  that 
the  brasen  altar  made  by  David  was  ever  taken  back  to 


ALTAR    BUILT    ON    MORIAH.  75 

its  place  before  the  Tabernacle.  There  is,  on  the  contrary, 
evidence  to  show  that  from  the  moment  of  David's 
authoritative  statement  to  that  effect,  the  site  of  the 
threshing-floor  became  the  place  of  sacrifice  for  all  Israel, 
and  that  the  national  sacrifices  provided  by  the  King 
(2  Chron.  xxxi.  3)  were,  from  this  time,  offered  thereon. 
If  so,  individual  and  occasional  sacrifices  of  peace-  or  sin- 
offerings  would  also  be  presented  there.  The  whole 
establishment  of  priests  and  Levites  engaged  in  this  work 
would  thus  be  transferred,  from  before  the  new  Tabernacle, 
to  the  place  which  the  Lord  had  chosen.  This  involved, 
further,  that  as  all  offerings  were  required  to  be  *  blown 
over*  by  trumpets  (Numbers  x.  10),  a  constant  service 
of  priests  would  be  in  attendance  there,  to  make  the  blasts, 
and  to  sprinkle  the  blood  upon  and  at  the  foot  of  the  altar. 

An  entirely  new  situation  had  thus  arisen  in  the 
conduct  of  the  public  worship  of  the  chosen  people.  The 
site  of  the  threshing-floor,  being  without  the  city,  left 
it  an  unenclosed  or  but  lightly-enclosed  space.  The 
miracle  so  unexpectedly  wrought  there  made  it,  in 
a  moment,  a  place  of  the  utmost  sanctity,  and  required 
it  to  be  guarded,  day  and  night,  against  the  intrusion 
of  unclean  animals  and  the  defilements  of  man.  No  eyes 
but  those  of  the  chosen  priests  and  worshippers  might 
gaze  on  an  altar  of  Judaism,  or  on  its  attendant  sacrifices. 

If  at  this  time  a  Levitical  guard  were  appointed,  it 
could  be  stationed  only  according  to  the  points  of  the 
coinpass,  as  there  was  no  enclosure-wall,  and  there  were 
no  gates. 

This  accordingly  was  what  was  done.      We  have  in 


76  THE    TABERNACLE. 

1  Chron.  xxvi.  an  account  of  some  rearrangement  of 
sanctuary  -  guards  which  can  apply  only  to  this  period 
of  history  and  to  these  special  circumstances.  Appoint- 
ments of  Levitical  guards  were  made  by  lot,  northward, 
southward,  eastward,  and  westward.  To  these  several 
directions  *  courses '  of  doorkeepers  were  apportioned, 
who  held  wards  one  over  against  another. 

As  we  examine  the  lists  of  these,  we  discover  that 
they  were  composed  largely  of  the  same  families  and  men 
as  had  previously  been  detailed  to  serve  the  Jerusalem 
Tabernacle  in  the  same  capacity,  the  transfer  of  the 
whole  body  of  guards  being  apparently  complete,  the 
number  being  at  the  same  time  increased.  The  total 
of  96  was  thus  made  up : — 

Obed-Edom  and  62  others 63 

Meshelemiah  and  18  others         ...     19 
Hosah  and  13  others 14 

96 

Of  the  three  'chief  men,'  Obed-Edom  and  Hosah 
have  already  been  before  us  as  chief  porters  on  Ophel. 
In  the  third  case,  Shelemiah,  or  Meshelemiah,  appears 
as  one  of  the  sons  of  Asaph,  with  a  contingent  from 
that  family  (1  Chron.  xxvi.  1).  This  is  what  we  should 
anticipate  when  we  remember  the  close  connection  of 
Asaph  with  the  Tabernacle  built  by  David. 

These  96  persons  were  divided  into  four  courses  under 
as  many  captains,  Zechariah,  the  son  of  Shelemiah, 
being  chosen  for  the  fourth  officer,  as  being  *a  discreet 
counsellor.' 


THREE    CENTRES    OF    WORSHIP.  77 

Their  stations  were  : — 

Eastward Shelemiah 

Northward       Zechariah^ 

Southward       Obed-Edom 

Westward        Hosah 

In  giving  us  these  statements  the  chronicler  adds 
several  particulars  of  his  own  knowledge  as  to  '  the 
storehouses,'  '  the  Parbar,'  and  *  the  Causeway,'  which 
are  intended  to  be  explanatory  of  the  various  places 
held  by  the  Levitical  watchers  during  the  standing  of 
Solomon's  Temple.  These  items  are  the  work  of  a  post- 
restoration  editor,  and  on  that  account  are  not  to  be 
rejected  as  untrue,  but  accepted  as  supplementary.  An 
unaltered  early  record  was  here  evidently  '  written  over,' 
later  material  being  incorporated. 

15.  There  were,  during  the  last  years  of  the  reign  of 
David,  three  centres  of  worship  in  Israel.  At  Gibeon 
was  the  original  Tent  and  altar.  On  Ophel  was  the 
tent  prepared  by  David,  with  its  sacred  depositum  of 
the  Ark,  before  which  incense  was  burned  daily.  On 
Moriah  was  the  new  altar  consecrated  by  the  command 
and  deed  of  Jehovah. 

When  the  prohibition  came  to  David  that  he  was  not 
to  build  the  Temple  behind  the  altar,  he  set  himself  to 
make  complete  preparations  for  its  erection  by  his  son. 

1  In  an  historical  parenthesis  of  two  and  a  half  verses,  written  by  a  post- 
restoration  scribe,  Zeehariah,  the  son  of  Meshelemiah,  is  said  to  have  been 
porter  of  the  door  of  the  tent  of  meeting  (1  Chron.  ix.  lO**,  20,  21),  thus 
confirming  the  above,  and  showing  the  persistence  with  which  the  term  '  door 
of  the  tent  of  meeting  '  was  applied  to  the  northern  or  sacrificial  gate. 


78  THE   TABERNACLE. 

Tiie  national  unity,  as  well  as  the  national  faith, 
required  the  supercession  of  rival  tabernacles  and  altars, 
and  the  aged  king  did  what  lay  in  his  power  to  hasten 
the  erection  of  the  Temple. 

A  great  step  was  taken  when  the  question  of  site  had 
been  settled  and  partially  occupied.  As  the  Temple  was 
to  stand  to  the  west  of  the  altar,  all  such  matters  as 
levels,  areas,  and  drainage  could  be  taken  into  account 
in  the  preparation  of  drawings  and  specifications.  That 
there  were  such  will  cause  no  shock  of  incredulity  to 
those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  elaborate  preparations 
made  by  the  architects  and  artists  of  antiquity.  Not 
only  were  such  prepared,  by  David's  orders,  but  care- 
fully compiled  bills  of  quantities  were  drawn  up,  in 
which  the  weight  of  gold  and  of  silver  for  all  the 
plate  and  furniture  to  be  used  in  the  new  Temple  was 
set  down,  item  by  item  (1  Chron.  xxviii.  14-18). 

The  drawings  of  the  plans  (called  the  '  pattern ') 
included  these  separate  items : — 

1.  The  pattern  of  the  porch,  with 

(a)  The  houses  thereof, 

(b)  The  treasuries  thereof, 

(c)  The  upper  rooms  thereof. 

2.  The  pattern  of  the  inner  chambers,  one  being, 

The  house  of  the  Mercy-Seat,  or  Holy  of  Holies. 

3.  The  pattern  of  the  courts  of  the  house,  with 

{d)  The  chambers  round  about, 

(e)    The  treasuries  of  the  House  of  God, 

(/)  The  treasuries  of  the  dedicated  things. 

(1  Chron.  xxviii.  11-12.) 


DAVID'S    PLANS    FOR    THE    TEMPLE.     79 

1.  By  the  first  of  these  we  are  to  understand  the  design 
or  plan  for  the  porch  of  120  cubits  (  =  144  feet)  in 
height. 

(a)  By  the  'houses*  or  rooms  *  thereof/  is  intended 
a  royal  oratory  over  the  porch  entrance,  with  an  attic 
above  it,  in  which  was  stored,  at  one  time,  the  wine 
offered  with  all  peace-offerings  (Jeremiah  xxxv.  1-5). 

(b)  The  treasuries  of  the  porch  were  two  small  rooms 
with  thick  walls,  one  on  either  side  of  the  porch  entrance- 
hall  (called  *  the  entry  of  the  house,'  2  Chron.  iv.  22), 
in  which  were  kept  the  golden  and  silver  vessels  of  the 
sanctuary  (1  Kings  vii.  51).  These  included  the  furniture 
of  the  altar,  and  were  under  the  immediate  care  of  the 
High-priest  and  his  deputies.^ 

(c)  By  the  upper  rooms  of  the  Temple  we  are  to 
understand  the  two  attics  over  the  two  holy  chambers, 
and  of  the  same  floor-area  as  they.  In  Herod's  Temple 
they  were  divided  by  a  low  railing,  below  the  ceiling 
of  the  roof,  which  may  have  been  the  continuation  of 
a  precedent. 

2.  The  inner  chambers  were  the  pronaos  and  the 
adytum,  known  as  the  Holy  Place  and  the  Holy  of  Holies. 
The  latter  of  these  was  a  cube  of  24  feet,  and  the  former 
a  double  cube  of  the  same  dimensions. 

3.  The  transfer  of  thought  in  verse  12,  from  the  central 
and    main    building    to    the    surrounding    structures,   is 

^  A  somewhat  similar  plan  was  afterwards  adopted  in  the  Parthenon,  which 
was  finished  in  438  B.C.  The  Temple  proper  was  divided,  by  pillars,  into 
three  parts.  In  the  western  of  these  small  chambers  were  kept  vessels  for  use 
in  the  sacred  processions,  with  articles  of  gold  and  silver.  It  became  the 
Treasury  or  State  Bank  of  Athens. 


80  THE   TABERNACLE. 

marked  by  another  introduction,  in  the  words  ^  And  the 
pattern  of  all  that  he  had  by  the  Spirit.' 

The  first  of  these  to  be  mentioned  is  the  '  pattern  of 
the  courts  of  the  house,'  by  which  we  understand  the 
arrangement  of  one  court,  called  the  priest's  or  inner  court, 
within  another  court,  called  the  people's  or  outer  court. 
Such  was  the  interior  disposition  of  the  enclosed  ground- 
area  upon  which  the  Temple  stood,  as  will  appear  later. 

{d)  By  the  *  chambers  round  about '  are  intended  the 
three  stories  of  thirty  priests'  chambers  that  were  built 
outside  the  side  walls  of  the  Temple  and  of  the  Oracle 
(1  Kings  vi.  b-Q).  These  are  spoken  of  as  being  a  portion 
of  the  court,  and  not  of  the  Temple  itself — a  fact  which 
was  emphasized  in  Ezekiel's  Temple-plan  by  their  having 
separate  w^alls  adjoining  those  of  the  sanctuary,  and  in 
Solomon's  by  the  ceiling  beams  resting  free.  As  they 
were  for  the  use  of  man,  and  not  a  part  of  the  dwelling- 
place  of  the  Most  High,  they  are  appropriately  ranged  as 
a  part  of  one  of  the  courts. 

{e)  The  treasuries  of  the  House  of  God  were  wholly 
distinct  from  those  of  the  Temple,  already  mentioned. 
They  were  the  storehouses,  the  outward  care  of  which 
was  committed  to  the  sons  of  Obed-Edom,  and  described 
as  being  on  the  southward  side  of  the  Temple  area 
(1  Chron.  XX vi.  15,  17).  Possibly  built  by  David  during 
his  lifetime,  as  their  being  separately  guarded  would 
imply,  1    their    contents    were    placed    in    the    care    of 

^  From  the  statement  that  King  Hezekiah  had  store -chamhers,  to  contain 
the  tithes,  built  within  the  enclosed  area  of  the  Temple  (2  Chron.  xxxi.  11), 
it  may  be  inferred  that  till  his  time  they  had  stood  without  that  enclosure 


DESCENDANTS    OF    MOSES.  81 

Shebuel,  representative  of  Gershom,  the  eldest  son  of 
Moses  (1  Chron.  xxvi.  24).  In  them  was  stored  the  corn 
and  wine  and  oil  which  were  paid  as  tithes  by  the  whole 
nation,  and  which  formed  so  large  a  part  of  the  sus- 
tenance of  priests  and  Levites.  It  was  the  plan  of  these 
erections,  together  with  their  place  in  the  court,  that 
David  gave  to  Solomon,  as  '  the  pattern  of  the  treasuries 
of  the  House  of  God.*  These  structures  are  afterwards 
mentioned  by  Nehemiah  as  being  the  '  storehouses  of  the 
Gates  '  (Nehemiah  xii.  25). 

(/)  The  treasuries  of  dedicated  things  were  two 
chambers  similar  to  the  last  described,  in  which  were 
placed  all  the  spoil  won  in  battle  from  the  time  of  Joshua 
and  after.  The  references  to  this  will  be  found  in 
Numbers  xxxi.  21-23,  51-54,  and  1  Chron.  xxvi.  26-28. 

These  chambers  when  built  were  placed  under  the  care 
of  Shelomoth,  the  lineal  descendant  of  Eliezer,  the  second 
son  of  Moses.  In  this  way  did  later  generations  honour 
the  memory  of  their  great  lawgiver.  The  care  of  the 
outside  property  of  the  Temple  was  thus  uniformly  com- 
mitted to  the  Levites,  and  over  the  whole  of  the  chambers, 
the  contents  of  which  were  committed  to  the  sons  of 
Moses,  was  placed  a  chief  treasurer  named  Ahijah,  also 
a  Levite  (1  Chron.  xxvi.  20).  It  was  not  he  who  wrote  the 
book  of  the  acts  of  Solomon  mentioned  in  2  Chron.  ix.  29. 
The  scribe  is  described  as  a  Shilonite,  or  resident  of 
Shiloh  (1  Kings  xiv.  2),  and  therefore  an  Ephraimite, 
while  the  superintendent  of  the  treasuries  was  a  Levite. 

and  to  the  south  of  it.  lu  the  Herodian  Temple  they  occupied  the  four 
comers  of  the  Treasury  Court,  which  lay  to  the  south  of  the  Temple. 


82  THE   TABERNACLE. 

The  tribal  affinities  of  these  three  families  of  Levites 
(as  already  given)  are  confirmed  by  the  statement  of 
1  Chron.  xxvi.  19,  that  the  courses  of  the  doorkeepers 
were  '  of  the  Korahites  and  the  sons  of  Merari/  Obed- 
Edom  being  a  Korahite,  of  the  family  of  Korah,  and 
Shemaiah  and  Hosah  being  Merarites. 

It  is  probable  that,  at  the  first,  the  altar  on  the 
threshing-floor  was  guarded  by  a  single  sentinel  on  each 
of  its  four  sides,  the  captain  for  each  side  furnishing 
these  in  rotation  out  of  the  twenty-four  men  of  which 
his  guard  consisted.  Or,  the  Jewish  month  being  one 
of  four  weeks,  each  course  may  have  furnished  the  guards 
for  a  single  week  in  turn.  As,  however,  the  Temple 
service  became  more  elaborate  with  Solomon's  erection, 
the  number  of  guards  on  duty  at  the  same  time  was 
increased  to  twenty -four.  It  is  the  stations  of  this 
enlarged  guard  that  are  detailed  by  the  chronicler. 
A  curious  error  of  some  copyist  occurs  in  the  first  two 
words  of  verse  16,  chapter  xxvi.,  the  last  word  of  the 
previous  verse  being  repeated,  and  the  corrected  sentence 
reading  '  To  Hosah  westward.'  The  twenty-four  guards 
on  duty  in  the  Temple  of  Herod,  with  their  stations,  are 
given  in  the  Mischna,  and  will  be  referred  to  in  due 
course.  This  number  was  continued  from  the  time  of 
Solomon's  Temple  to  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  by 
Titus,  and  is  that  given  by  the  chronicler,  at  the 
restoration,  as  a  matter  of  previous  history  (1  Chron. 
xxvi.  12-19). 

16.    I.    From    the    two -verse    recapitulation    of    the 


SOLOMON    BECOMES    KING.  83 

buildings  to  be  erected  It  is  evident  that  it  is  an  in- 
complete summary  of  them.  It  is  so  for  two  reasons. 
One,  because  it  does  not  include  any  docket  of  state 
erections  or  royal  dwellings.  The  bouse  of  the  forest 
of  Lebanon,  the  palaces  that  Solomon  built  for  himself 
and  Pharaoh's  daughter,  and  the  hall  of  justice  or 
judgment  are  not  included.  Civic  conveniences  and 
state  requirements  were  not  classed  with  Divine  ap- 
pointments. Another  reason  may  be  that  the  roll  of 
the  patterns  given  to  Solomon  may  have  contained 
ground-plans  and  drawings  of  the  courts  and  their 
surrounding  erections.  The  plan  of  Gudea's  palace 
(v.  Plate,  p.  142),  dating  back  to  nearly  twenty  centuries 
before  David's  day,  may  suffice  to  show  how  such  outline- 
drawings  were  prepared.  Not  only  were  these  drawings 
and  building-specifications  complete,  but  the  weight  of 
the  precious  metals  for  every  item  of  furniture  was 
calculated.  We  know  that,  in  place  of  the  single 
seven-branched  candlestick  in  the  Tabernacle,  ten  such 
candlesticks  were  made  (1  Kings  vii.  49).  Beside  these, 
a  new  golden  altar  of  incense  and  ten  tables  of  shew- 
bread  were  constructed.  Also  the  gold-plating  for  the 
two  olive-wood  cherubim,  which  flanked  the  ark,  was 
estimated  for.  All  the  gold  and  silver  for  these  articles 
of  furniture  was  duly  estimated  and  provided.  The  ark 
of  the  Covenant  alone  remained  unrenewed. 

The  last  official  act  of  David's  reigu  was  to  hand  over 
these  documents  to  Solomon  in  a  national  assembly  of  the 
heads  of  the  people,  with  solemn  charges  to  him  and  to 
them  to  carry  out  the  work  of  building  the  Temple  with 


84  THE   TABERNACLE. 

courage  and  zeal.  On  the  next  day,  amid  great  religious 
festivities,  Solomon  was,  a  second  time,  anointed  king, 
and  assumed  the  reins  of  government. 

IL  Amongst  the  papyri  or  parchments  handed  to  the 
j^outhful  sovereign  on  this  memorable  day  was  one  con- 
taining nominal  lists  of  the  courses  of  the  priests  and 
Levites,  who  should  do  all  the  work  of  the  service  of  the 
house  of  the  Lord  on  its  completion  (1  Chron.  xxviii.  13). 

The  preparation  of  this  record  involved  immense  labour, 
and  was  accomplished  when  David  was  old  and  full  of 
days.  Of  even  greater  age  was  Zadok,  from  Gibeon, 
and  with  them  was  young  Ahimelech,  son  of  Abiathar 
(1  Chron.  xxiv.  3). 

(a)  The  succession  to  the  High -priesthood  in  the  new 
Temple  was  left  undetermined  and  untouched.  It  was 
solved,  as  we  know,  by  the  deposition  of  Abiathar,  soon 
after  Solomon's  accession. 

(b)  The  priests  were  scheduled,  and  it  was  found  that 
there  were  many  more  of  one  family  than  of  the  other. 
In  the  division  into  twenty-four  courses  the  lots  were  so 
cast  as  to  effect  a  complete  amalgamation  of  the  rival 
hierarchies.  Two  lots  were  taken  from  the  house  of 
Eleazar,  and,  alternately,  one  from  the  house  of  Ithamar. 
The  name  of  the  prince  of  each  course  is  given  in 
1  Chron.  xxiv.  Three  of  these  were  known  by  the  same 
names  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (1  Chron.  ix.  10,  and 
Nehemiah  xi.  11). 

(c)  The  Levites  were  similarly  divided  into  an  equal 
number   of  courses    for   rotation   in   service.      Of  these 


TEMPLE    SERYICE    OEGANIZED.  85 

courses  nine  were  formed  of  Gershonites,  nine  of 
Kohathites,  and  six  of  Merarites.  Each  of  the  courses 
consisted  of  a  thousand  men.  Their  duties  are  defined  as 
those  of  tithe-gatherers,  police,  cooks,  weighers,  sweepers 
and  cleaners  (1  Chron.  xxxiii,  28-32,  and  Nehemiah 
xii.  44-47). 

(d)  The  singers,  again,  were  divided  into  twenty-four 
courses  of  twelve  members  each.  These  were  chosen  for 
their  fitness  for  this  work,  and  not  by  their  descent  alone. 
Fourteen  of  the  sections  were  Kohathites,  six  Merarites, 
and  four  Gershonites.  In  the  Temple  built  after  the 
Captivity,  to  the  singers  were  assigned  certain  chambers 
attached  to  the  Temple,  it  being  explained  that  they 
dwelt  in  the  chambers,  for  they  were  employed  in  their 
work  day  and  night  (1  Chron.  ix.  33).  The  number  of 
twelve  to  each  choir  was  retained.  The  Asaphite  choir 
of  2  Chron.  xxxv.  15  is  to  be  understood  as  being  so 
named  after  its  founder. 

The  way  in  which  these  several  courses  of  priests, 
Levites,  and  singers  rotated  in  service  was  dependent 
upon  the  peculiar  division  of  time  amongst  the  Hebrews. 
Their  months  were  lunar,  twelve  of  which  were  reckoned 
to  each  year,  with  an  intercalary  month,  called  a  second 
Adar,  inserted  now  and  again  to  keep  the  seasons.  Seven 
such  were  required  every  nineteen  years. 

Each  of  the  several  twenty-four  courses  was  on  duty 
for  a  single  week  at  a  time,  the  exchanges  taking  place 
at  noon  on  the  Sabbath.  An  illustrative  use  made  of  this 
custom  may  be  seen  in  the  account  of  the  revolution 
under  Jehoiada,  which  owed  its  military  success  largely 


86  THE   TABERNACLE. 

to  the  fact  of  there  being  two  courses  of  priests  and 
Levites  in  the  Temple  at  the  same  hour  (2  Kings  xi.  9). 

In  this  way  each  course  undertook  duty  twice  in  forty- 
eight  weeks,  the  occasional  insertion  of  an  intercalary 
month  providing  variety,  so  that  in  the  course  of  a  few 
years  every  set  of  courses  would  attend  at  each  of  the 
four  seasons. 

(e)  As  the  number  of  Levites  was  in  excess  of  those 
required  for  the  interior  service  of  the  sanctuary,  others 
were  appointed  doorkeepers,  to  the  number  of  four 
thousand.  These  were  chosen  exclusively  from  the  clan 
of  Merari  and  from  the  family  of  Korah  the  Kohathite, 
to  which  Obed-Edom  belonged.  It  is  not  stated  in  the 
contemporary  histories  that  the  porters  attended  in 
courses.  On  the  restoration  we  find  that  the  four  chief 
porters,  who  were  Levites,  had  their  lodging  round  about 
the  house  of  God,  and  their  brethren  in  their  villages 
were  to  come  in  every  seven  days  from  time  to  time  to 
be  with  them  (I  Chron.  ix.  25-27).  The  number  on 
duty  every  day  is  given  by  the  Talmud  at  240,  ten  being 
detailed  for  each  of  the  twenty-four  stations  in  the  Herodian 
Temple.  It  is,  therefore,  evident  that  there  must  have 
been  some  system  of  relief  by  which  a  part  only  of  the 
4,000  ^  porters  should  be  on  duty  at  once.  It  was  their  d  uty 
to  see  that  no  one  ceremonially  impure  should  be  admitted 
into  the  court  of  the  sanctuary  (2  Chron.  xxiv.  19). 

A  writer  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible  {art. 
Genealogy,   iii.   20)    finds   a   difficulty   in    the   fact  that 

*  Each  of  the  four  chief  doorkeepers  thus  had  the  command  of  a  thousand 
assistants.     This  would  allow  of  40  for  each  of  25  weeks. 


COUETS    OF    LAW    READJUSTED.  87 

Jehdeiah  and  Isshiah,  chief  men  of  the  eons  of  Amram, 
father  of  Moses,  were  the  contemporaries  of  the  descendants 
of  Moses,  who  were  the  rulers  of  the  treasuries.  This 
difficulty  is  obviated  if  it  be  observed  that  these  two  men 
were  the  heads  of  '  the  red  of  the  sons  of  Levi '  (1  Chron. 
xxiv.  20)  after  the  principal  appointments  had  been  made. 

(/)  Of  the  surplus  of  14,000,  six  thousand  others 
became  officers  and  judges.^  B}^  the  Law  of  Moses  judg*  s 
and  officers  were  to  be  appointed  in  every  Levltical  city  of 
the  tribes  (Deut.  xvi.  18),  and,  from  the  blessing  of  Moses, 
the  tribe  of  Levi  was  to  'Teach  Jacob  thy  judgements 
and  Israel  thy  law '  (compare  Deut,  xxi.  5  and  xxxiii.  10). 

The  appointment  of  these  6,000  was  not,  therefore, 
a  new  thing,  but  a  reconstruction  of  the  personal 
machinery  of  the  Law.  In  the  days  of  Nehemiah, 
Levltes  are  described  as  having  the  oversight  of  the 
outward  business  of  the  house  of  God  (Nehemiah  xl.  16), 
which  would  include  the  administration  of  law  as  well  as 
the  collection  of  tithes. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Chenaniah,  the  chief 
Levite,  who  conducted  the  music  when  the  ark  was 
brought  to  Jerusalem  (1  Chron.  xv.  22),  was  now^,  with 
his  sons,  appointed  over  this  great  department  of  State 
(1  Chron.  xxvi.  29). 

(g)  Four  thousand  others  were  appointed  Instrumental 
musicians,  and  were  thus  completely  separated  from 
the  singers,  and  given  an  inferior  position.     Tliey  were 

1  Connting  eastern  and  western  Manasseh  as  two  tribes,  this  would  give 
an  average  of  500  Levites  for  legal  purposes  to  each  tribe.  Each  mmor 
court  consisted  of  uot  less  than  seven  persons. 


88  THE    TABERNACLE. 

not  divided  into  courses,  and  it  is  supposed  that  their 
services  in  the  Temple  were  voluntary  and  occasional.  ^ 
Of  course,  like  other  Levites,  they  had  their  share  in 
the  Temple  offerings  when  there,  and  their  right  to  a  plot 
of  land  in  one  of  the  cities  of  the  Levites. 

17.  Not  only  was  the  personnel  of  the  priesthood 
reformed  before  David's  abdication ;  the  land  held  by 
them  was  also  subjected  to  revision. 

By  Joshua's  direction  twelve  cities  had  been  set  apart 
for  the  Aaronites,  and  an  average  of  twelve  others  for 
each  of  the  three  clans  of  Levi,  forty-eight  in  all. 

Of  these,  six  were  cities  of  refuge,  to  afford  protection 
to  those  who  were  guilty  of  homicide,  as  distinguished 
from  murder.  For  the  purposes  of  easy  access  these 
towns  were  selected  principally  for  their  central 
situations.  According  to  the  direction  of  Deut.  xix.  3, 
three  were  on  the  east  and  three  on  the  west  of  the 
Jordan.  Those  on  the  east  were  first  chosen,  and,  later, 
three  others  on  the  west,  the  positions  of  which  were 
as  nearly  as  possible  in  line  with  those  on  the  east. 
Thus,  Bezer  in  the  wilderness  (Joshua  xx.  8)  was 
paralleled  by  Hebron.  The  ruins  of  Kusur  Beshaer 
are  three  miles  south-west  of  Dibon,  and  lie  on  the 
north  bank  of  the  river  Arnon.  The  Anion  was  the 
northern  boundary  of  Moab  at  the  time  of  the  conquest, 

^  Eeferring  to  the  Herodian  Temple,  Edersheim  says,  '  The  number  of 
instrumental  performers  was  not  limited,  nor  yet  confined  to  the  Levites, 
some  of  the  distinguished  families  which  had  intennarried  with  the  priests 
being  admitted  to  the  service  '  {The  Temple,  p.  143).  The  instruments  used 
were  cymbals,  psalteries,  and  harps  (2  Chron.  xxix.  25). 


ECCLESIASTICAL    TOWNS    EEYISED.       89 

but  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah  (xlviii.  24),  after  the  fall  of 
Samaria  and  the  captivity  of  eastern  tribes,  under  the 
name  Bozrah,^  Bezer  belonged  to  Moab.  It  is  mentioned 
on  the  Moabite  Stone  as  having  been  rebuilt  by  Mesha. 

The  two  central  refuge  cities  were  Shechem  in  the 
west  and  Ramoth-in-Gilead  in  the  division  of  Gad 
( =  Eeimun),  on  nearly  the  same  parallel  of  latitude. 

The  two  northern  refuge  towns  were  Kedesh-in- Galilee 
( =  Kades)  and  Golan  in  Bashan.  As  a  possible  site 
for  Golan,  Dr.  Merrill  suggests  es  Sanamein  on  the  Haj 
pilgrim-road,  and  in  the  proper  latitude. 

Of  these  six  towns  Hebron  was  occupied  by  priests 
and  Kohathite  Levites,  Shechem  by  Kohathites,  Golan 
and  Kedesh  by  Gershonites,  and  Bezer  and  Raraoth  by 
Merarites.  No  change  in  any  of  them  was  carried  out  at 
tbe  time  of  David's  revision. 

{a)  Twelve  other  towns,  in  the  divisions  of  Judah, 
Simeon,  and  Benjamin,  were  set  apart,  at  the  occupation, 
to  be  inhabited  by  the  families  of  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
known  later  as  Aaronites.  The  only  indication  we  have  of 
the  number  of  their  inhabitants  is  that  given  at  the  time 
of  David's  removal  from  Hebron  to  Jerusalem,  when  we 
are  told  that  nine  hundred  men  of  the  house  of  Aaron 
under  Zadok,  afterwards  High  -  priest,  came  to  make 
David  king. 

If  we  except  some  slight  changes  of  name,  as  Hilen  for 
Holon,  Allemeth  for  Almon,  there  are  but  two  or  three 
alterations  in  them  at  the  time  of  David.     One   is    the 

^  That  Bezer  was  also  known  as  Bozrah  is  confirmed  by  Eusebius 
{Onom.  232).     There  was  a  second  Bozrah  in  Bashan. 


90  THE   TABERNACLE. 

substitution  of  Asban  for  Ain,  in  the  land  of  Simeon. 
These  places  were  neighbouring  towns  near  to  Beersheba 
(Joshua  xix.  7). 

Another  modification  of  Joshua's  list  is  of  greater 
significance ;  it  is  that  of  the  omission  of  Gibeon  as  a  city 
of  the  priests,  with  no  substitute.  In  this  severe  treat- 
ment we  have  one  certain  result  of  Saul's  attempt  to  make 
Gibeon  the  capital  city.  Its  complete  supercession  as  a 
sacred  place  is  strong  evidence  of  that  intention,  as  no 
other  reason  of  sufficient  weight  can  be  found  to  have 
caused  so  violent  and  unparalleled  a  disturbance  of  the 
long-existing  order.  The  removal  of  the  priests'  families 
from  Gibeon  would  largely  diminish  its  relative  import- 
ance in  the  cities  of  Israel,  and  was  also  in  the  nature  of 
a  punishment  inflicted  upon  them,  as  having  been  parties 
to  Saul's  policy  of  local  aggrandisement.  Juttah  in  Judah 
was  also  abandoned,  as  the  division  of  Judah  had  an 
undue  number  of  sacerdotal  cities,  and  the  scheme  of 
reduction  was  to  take  two  cities  from  the  priests  and  four 
from  the  Levites. 

(b)  This  diminution  of  two  in  the  number  of  the 
priestly  towns  was  accompanied  by  some  similar  cases  in 
the  Levitical  cities,  though  the  causes  of  the  reduction  in 
their  case  are  more  obscure.  The  capture  of  Jerusalem, 
and  its  coming  importance  as  the  prospective  place  of 
the  Temple,  would  bring  a  large  number  of  priests  and 
Levites  into  it,  and  would  thus  contribute  to  the  desira- 
bility of  lessening  the  number  of  Levitical  towns  on  the 
new  register. 

Another  political  change  which  had  occurred  within 


REDUCTION    OF    PRIESTLY    TOWNS.      91 

the  past  three  centuries  was  that,  during  the  time  of  the 
Judges,  the  small  tribe  of  Dan,  originally  located  about 
the  seaboard  of  Joppa,  had  removed  to  the  northern  Dan 
lying  near  the  sources  of  the  Jordan.  The  tribe  consisted 
of  but  a  single  clan,  the  patriarch  Dan  having  had  but 
one  son.^ 

The  600  men  who  went  to  form  the  settlement  at 
Laish  were  probably  the  bulk  of  the  tribes'  manhood,  but 
some  families  must  have  remained  at  home,  as  Samson's 
exploits  were  subsequent  to  the  migration.  In  the  south, 
the  tribe  gradually  declined  in  numbers,  though  it  is  not 
correct  to  say,  as  does  a  writer  in  Hastings'  Dictionary 
(art.  Dan),  that  the  tribe  is  'omitted  from  the  genealogies 
of  the  Chronicles.'  Hushim  is  there  named  (1  Chron. 
vii.  12),  and  in  his  proper  place  in  the  order  of  the  tribes, 
Judah  being  named  first  as  that  of  the  Tribe  of  David, 
and  Benjamin  last  as  that  of  the  ex-royal  family  of  Saul. 

The  vacant  territory  of  Dan,  never  more  than  partially 
conquered,  was  occupied  in  part  by  the  Philistines  and 
in  part  by  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  (Judges  i.  34,  35).  As 
a  consequence  we  find  that  when  David  rearranged  the 
Levitical  cities  the  name  of  Dan  is  not  mentioned,  and 
those  of  Ephraim  are  introduced  with  the  enigmatical 
sentence,  '  Some  of  the  families  of  the  sons  of  Kohath  had 
cities  of  their  border  [taken]  out  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  ' 
(1  Chron.  vi.  66).  The  hidden  reference  here  is  to  the 
fact  that  of  the  four  Kohathite  towns  formerly  attributed 

^  '  Shuham '  in  Numbers  xxvi.  42  is  the  result  of  a  simple  transposition 
of  the  letters  of  Hushim  (Genesis  ilvi  23).  In  1  Chron.  vii,  12  there  is 
a  scornful  reference  to  idolatrous  Dan  in  '  Aher '  as  '  Another  one.' 


92  THE    TABERNACLE. 

to  the  tribe  of  Dan,  two,  Eltekeh  and  Gibbetbon,  entirely 
disappear,  and  two,  Aijalon  and  Gatb-riramon,  are  included 
in  those  of  Ephraim. 

Another  change  in  the  Ephraimite  towns  of  the 
Kohathites  was  the  substitution  of  Jokneam,  at  the 
eastern  foot  of  Mount  Carmel,  for  Kibzaim,  a  town  in 
the  south  of  the  tribe,  mentioned  with  Gezer  ^  and 
Bethhoron  (Joshua  xxi.  22),  and  wbich  had  probably 
fallen  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines,  or  been  destroyed 
by  war. 

At  its  first  mention,  Jokmeam  (called  Jokneam, 
Joshua  xxi.  34,  now  Tell  Keimiin)  appears  as  a  border 
town  of  Zebulun,  and  was  given  to  the  Merarites.  It 
was  now,  by  David,  transferred  to  Ephraim,  being  on 
their  boundary,  and  given  to  the  Kohathites.  Ephraim 
thus  gained  an  extension  of  territory  to  the  north  as  well 
as  to  the  south,  this  being  one  of  man)''  indications  of  the 
growing  power  of  that  tribe. 

In  the  adjoining  division  of  western  Manasseh,  the 
Kohathite  towns  of  Taanach  (Joshua  xxi.  25)  and  Gath- 
rimmon  were  replaced  by  Aner  ( =  Elldr),  north-west 
of  Shechem,  and  Ibleam  (Joshua  xvii.  11),  the  modern 
Yebla,  five  miles  north  of  Bethshan. 

The  number  of  towns  in  the  occupation  of  the  Kohathites 
was  thus  reduced  from  ten  to  eight,  the  two  Danite  towns 
of  Elteke,  the  Eltekeh  of  Joshua  xix.  44,  and  Gibbethon, 

^  Gezer  was  a  city  of  the  Kohathite  Levites,  now  known  as  Tell  Jezer, 
lying  between  the  road  and  the  rail  from  Jaffa  to  Jerusalem.  A  rock 
inscription  has  been  foimd  here,  the  translation  of  which  is,  '  The  boundary 
of  Gezer.*  As  Gezer  was  a  walled  town  (1  Kings  ix.  17),  this  inscription 
should  measure  600  yards  from  the  wall  of  the  city. 


EEDUCTION    OF    KOHATHITE    TOWNS.    93 

modern  Ras-el-Ain,  being  finally  lost  to  them  and,  for  the 
time,  to  the  nation.^ 

{c)  The  thirteen  towns  given  by  Joshua  to  the  sons 
of  Gershon  remained  unaltered  in  number  to  the  time 
of  Solomon.  A  comparison  of  the  early  list  with  that 
of  the  monarchy  shows,  as  might  be  expected,  some 
changes  in  name.     Thus  : — 

1.  Be-eshterah  (Josh.  xxi.  27)  (=:Houseof  Ashtoreth) 
becomes  Ashtaroth  (1  Chron.  vi.  71).  It  was  formerly 
one  of  the  royal  cities  of  Og,  King  of  Bashan,  and  its 
remains  are  known  as  Tell  ^Ashterah,  twenty  miles 
east  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias. 

2.  Kishion  in  Issachar  becomes  Kedesh,  on  the  west 
side  of  the  plain  of  Megiddo. 

3.  Mishal  in  Asher  becomes  Mashal,  now  Maisleh,  to 
the  north  of  the  Bay  of  Acre. 

4.  Hammoth-dor  in  Naphtali  becomes  Hammon,  the 
famous  hot  springs  at  the  south  of  the  Lake  of 
Gennesaret. 

5.  Kartan  in  Naphtali  becomes  Kiriathaim,  the 
meaning  in  each  case  being  *  double  city '  ;  to  the 
west  of  the  Sea  of  Tiberias,  but  undiscovered. 

A  more  serious  clerical  alteration  than  any  of  these 
is  a  copyist's  miswriting  of  Jarmuth  for  Kamoth  in 
Joshua  xxi.  29. 

There  was  a  place  of  this  name  in  the  Shephelah  of 

1  Nadab,  the  second  king  of  Israel,  attempted  to  wrest  Gibbethon  from 
the  Philistines,  and  was  assassinated  while  besieging  it  (1  Kings  xy.  27). 
The  siege  was  raised  by  Omri  (1  Kings  xvi.  15-17). 


94  THE    TABERNACLE. 

Jndah  (Joshua  xv.  35),  the  ruins  of  which  are  at  Yarmukf 
to  the  north  of  Socoh.  The  Ramoth  intended  is  a  town 
in  Issachar,  many  leagues  to  the  north.  Its  site  has  been 
recovered  at  er-Rdmeh,  between  Samaria  and  Dothan.  It 
is  the  Remeth  of  Joshua  xix.  21. 

Another  town  replaced  in  Issachar  was  En-gannim 
( =  fountain  of  gardens),  the  Jenin  of  to-day,  which 
gave  place  to  Anem  (=  two  springs),  and  is  represented 
by  the  modern  village  of  Anin,  on  the  hills  to  the  west 
of  the  great  plain. 

Also  Hukok,  the  modern  Yakiik,  to  the  west  of 
Capernaum,  in  the  territory  of  Naphtali,  took  the  place 
of  Helkath  in  the  territory  of  Asher  (=  Yerka).  The 
Gershonites'  thirteen  cities  therefore  remained  un- 
diminished in  number,  but  six  of  them  lay  in  the  two 
most  northerly  tribes  on  the  west,  and  two  in  far-off 
Bashan  on  the  east.  As  the  Levites  were  the  officers 
of  the  Law  and  Judges  in  all  the  Tribes,  it  was  necessary 
that  the  old  Jacobean  prophecy  should  be  fulfilled,  and 
that  they  should  be  divided  in  Jacob  and  scattered  in 
Israel  (Gfenesis  xlix.  7).  In  this  way  the  civilizing 
effects  of  law  were  everywhere  present,  and  the  temporary 
residence  of  Levites  in  all  the  cities  of  Israel  tended  to 
diminish  the  pressure  of  population  in  their  own  towns. 

{d)  Coming,  lastly,  to  the  twelve  cities  of  the  Merarites, 
we  note  that  of  these  eight  were  in  Eastern  Palestine — 
four  in  the  division  of  Reuben  and  four  in  that  of  Gad. 
These  towns  remained  unaltered,  in  number  and  in  name, 
from  the  days  of  the  conquest  to  those  of  the  monarchy — 
if  we  except  the  slight  alteration  of  Jahaz  into  Jahzah, 


EEDUCTION    OF    MEEARITE    TOAVNS.      95 

the  site  of  the  nation's  earliest  victory  after  the  crossing 
of  the  Arnon  (Deut.  ii.  32). 

As  a  counterbalance  to  this  serai-expatriation  of  more 
than  half  their  number,  the  Merarites  had  the  remaining 
four  cities  of  their  clan  amid  the  fertile  hills  and  valleys 
around  Nazareth  and  to  the  north  of  the  plain  of  Megiddo. 
This  was  the  territory  of  Zebulun,  and  for  some  reason 
which  cannot  now  be  divined  David  and  his  assessors 
made  a  complete  change  in  the  Merarite  holdings  in  this 
division. 

Jokneam  was  built  on  the  south  bank  of  the  river 
Kishon,  this  being  *  the  brook  that  is  before  Jokneam' 
(Joshua  xix.  11).  The  ford  of  the  river  was  always  the 
boundary  between  the  tribes  of  Zebulun  and  Issachar. 
The  eflPect  of  this  has  already  been  pointed  out  in  making 
Jokneam  a  town  of  the  Kohathites,  and  transferring  it 
to  Ephraim. 

The  three  Merarite  towns  which,  by  Joshua's  allocation, 
remained,  were  :  Kartah  (the  Kattath  of  Joshua  xix.  15), 
now  Kdna,  nine  miles  north  of  Nazareth ;  Dimnah, 
which,  from  not  being  mentioned  as  one  of  the  twelve 
towns  of  Zebulun  (Joshua  xix,  10-16),  is  wrongly  thought 
to  have  been  Rimmon ;  and  Nahalal,  now  Ain  Mdhil,  in 
the  same  range  of  hills  as  Nazareth. 

In  place  of  these  we  have  Rimmono,  in  the  same 
division,  built  at  a  river-pass  to  the  north  of  Cana-in- 
Galilee,  now  Rummdneh,  and  Tabor,  showing  a  reduction 
of  one  in  the  number  of  the  exchanges. 

Tabor  was  one  of  the  sixteen  cities  of  Issachar,  and 
was  built  on  the  top  of  the  well-known  hill  of  that  name, 


96  THE    TABEENACLE. 

six  miles  east  of  Nazaretb.  There  are  still  to  be  seen  on 
its  summit,  scattered  in  indiscriminate  confusion,  walls, 
arches,  and  foundations  (apparently  of  dwelling-houses), 
all  of  which  are  surrounded  by  the  remains  of  a  thick 
wall.  This  was  the  city  newly  given  to  the  Merarites 
out  of  the  country  of  Issachar,  in  place  of  two  others 
in  Zebulun  of  which  they  were  deprived. 

Of  the  four  towns  in  Zebulun  originally  granted  to 
them,  but  one  remained,  E-immon  or  Rimmono  ;  another 
was  transferred  to  a  neighbouring  country,  a  third  was 
chosen  from  a  contiguous  division,  and  one  was  altogether 
dropped.  The  net  result  was  that  the  total  number  of 
cities  occupied  by  the  Merarites  was  reduced  from  twelve 
to  ten. 

[e)  Omitting  the  six  cities  of  refuge  and  the  twelve 
priestly  towns  as  being  (with  the  omissions  of  Gibeon  and 
Juttah)  unchanged,  the  thirty  purely  Levitical  cities  were, 
by  David  and  his  advisers,  reduced  to  twenty -six  in 
number.  This  reduction  of  four  ^  would  greatly  facilitate 
the  work  of  revision,  as  it  would  be  easier  to  remove 
a  body  of  Levites  from  any  locality,  and  to  give  the 
land  and  houses  to  the  laity,  than  it  would  be  to  reverse 
the  process.  In  the  four  cases  where  this  was  done,  Aner, 
Bileam,  Hukkok,  and  Tabor,  the  removal  of  the  original 
Israelites  to  other  sites  was  accompanied  by  giving  them 
the  vacated  towns  of  Kibzaim,  Taanach,  Gath-rimmon, 
Helkath,  Kartah,  and  Nahalal,  the  transfer  from  Engannim 
to  Anem  being  probably  to  an  unoccupied  site. 

1  The  superseded  towns  were  Aijalon  and  Gath-rimmon  of  Dan,  Kibzaim 
of  Ephraim,  and  Nahalal  of  Zebulun. 


DISCONTENT    REMOVED.  97 

The  whole  process  shows  that,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
authorities,  the  Levites  had  been  enjoying  an  undue 
share  of  the  national  property.  If  we  look  at  the  number 
of  Canaanite  towns  distributed  after  the  conquest,  we 
shall  be  struck  by  a  seemingly  great  anomaly.  Several 
of  the  tribal  divisions  are  given  in  their  boundaries  only, 
and  we  cannot  tell  how  many  towns  these  boundaries 
enclosed. 

In  seven  of  the  eleven  divisions  the  number  of  cities 
contained  in  each  is  given  in  totals.  These  numbered  in 
all  227  towns  or  agricultural  hamlets,  solitary  farmsteads 
being  unknown  in  Palestine.  Of  these  227  towns,  34  were 
given  either  to  the  priests  or  Levites,  being  nearly  one- 
sixth  of  the  whole,  instead  of  one-eleventh. 

This  undue  disproportion  is,  however,  lessened  by  the 
fact  that  the  Levitical  towns  had  a  limited  commonage 
attached  to  each,  of  from  500  to  1,000  yards  in  circum- 
ference, which  was  not  the  case  in  other  collections  of 
houses.  The  idea  evidently  was  that  the  priests  and 
Levites  should  approximate  to  the  urban  rather  than  to 
the  rural  type  of  character,  and  represent  a  higher  culture 
and  civilization. 

"With  the  growth  of  the  nation  and  an  increased 
pressure  of  population,  popular  discontent  at  such  an 
arrangement  was  sure  to  arise.  It  was  in  order  to  meet 
this  and  to  leave  no  seeds  of  dissatisfaction  in  the  people's 
minds  that  David  carried  out  his  revision  of  the  Church's 
property,  and  reduced  the  Levitical  and  priestly  towns 
from  48  in  number  to  42,  which  is  the  total  of  the  names 
in  1  Chron.  vi. 


98  THE   TABERNACLE. 

In  this  way  he  hoped  to  prepare  for  the  peaceful  reign 
of  his  son,  then  about  18  years  of  age.  The  removal 
of  these  grievances  against  the  ecclesiastics  v^ould  be 
possible  to  their  veteran  leader,  and  might  not  be  so  to 
his  successor,  while  his  well-known  and  tried  sympathy 
with  the  clergy  of  his  day  would  render  acceptable  to 
them  changes  that  would  be  sure  to  be  resented  as 
coming  from  Solomon. 

These  are  the  motives  with  which  we  may  credit 
David  in  his  difficult  and  gigantic  task.  All  was  done  in 
preparation  for,  and  in  anticipation  of,  the  building  of  the 
Temple,  and  of  the  contented  labour  in  it  of  the  38,000 
Levites  (1  Chron.  xxiii.  3)  whom  the  census  had  revealed, 
all  of  whom  were,  in  one  department  or  another,  called 
to  its  service. 

18.  It  was  with  a  statesman's  prescience  that  David 
made  these  various  preparations  for  the  government 
of  the  country  after  his  decease.  A  large  share  of 
the  financial  prosperity  and  political  progress  that 
characterized  Solomon's  reign  is  to  be  credited  to  him. 
The  changes  and  developments  initiated  by  him  were 
gradually  introduced.  Thus  the  geographical  changes 
and  the  reorganization  of  the  legal  work  of  the  country 
was  probably  carried  out  during  the  first  three  years  of 
Solomon's  reign,  and  before  the  work  of  building  the 
Temple  had  begun. 

During  these  years  an  event  of  family  history  occurred 
which  had  large  consequences.  It  was  the  request  by 
Adonijah  for   Abishag  the    Shunamite.      This   at   once 


HIGH-PEIESTHOOD    SETTLED.  99 

aroused  the  somewhat  unreasoning  wrath  of  Solomon, 
and  was  followed  by  the  immediate  execution  of  Adonijah 
and  Joab,^  and  by  the  deposition  of  Abiathar^  who  was 
banished  to  his  estate  at  Anathoth.  With  him  his  son 
Ahimelech  disappears  from  the  page  of  history. 

It  was  the  daily  duty  of  the  High-priest  to  burn 
incense  before  the  ark  of  the  Covenant  at  the  time  of 
the  morning  and  evening  sacrifice,  the  while  the  priests 
without  blew  with  silver  trumpets  till  the  burnt-offerings 
were  consumed  (2  Chron.  xxix.  28).  It  is  apparent  that 
by  the  summary  discharge  of  Abiathar  this  principal  duty 
could  no  longer  be  performed,  as,  till  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees,  no  other  than  the  High-priest  performed  this 
duty.  In  New  Testament  times  it  was  discharged  by 
a  priest  chosen  daily  by  lot  (Luke  i.  10). 

It  does  not  seem  that  Abiathar  had  anything  to  do 
with  the  request  of  Adonijah,  though  he  had  been 
implicated  in  his  previous  attempt  to  seize  the  throne 
(1  Kings  i.  27).  His  dismissal  from  office  was,  therefore, 
an  act  of  State  policy,  as  it  solved  the  difficulty  of  there 
being  a  dual  High-priesthood  in  Israel. 


1  As  Joab's  mother  was  David's  sister,  he  was  cousin  to  Solomon.  His 
violent  death  at  the  altar  raised  a  strong  feeling  of  revulsion  amongst  the 
members  of  his  own  family  and  clan.  These  were  descendants  of  Shelah, 
eldest  surviving  son  of  Judah  (1  Chron.  iv.  21).  Owing  to  the  feeling 
engendered,  a  number  of  them  migrated  to  Moab,  where  they  rose  to  power, 
and  are  said  to  have  'had  dominion.'  The  migration  must  have  been  that 
of  a  considerable  body,  as  on  the  restoration,  several  centuries  later,  2,812 
returned,  'children  of  Pahath-Moab  (  =  governor  of  Moab),  of  the  children 
of  Jcshua  and  Joab '  (Ezra  ii.  6).  Two  hundred  others  retui-ned  from 
Babylon  with  Ezra  (viii.  4).  In  these  lists  the  Shilonite  family  of  Pahath- 
Moab  is  uniformly  associated  with  others  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 


100  THE    TABERNACLE. 

For  a  short  time  the  service  of  burning  incense  in  the 
Tabernacle  must  have  been  discontinued,  as  Zadok  served 
the  Tabernacle  at  Gibeon,  where,  however,  there  was  no 
golden  altar,  and  incense  was  not  offered. 

In  this  crisis  it  would  seem  that  a  resolution  was  taken 
to  close  the  worship  at  Gibeon,  but  to  do  so  with  all 
the  wealth  of  ceremony  and  of  sacrifice  of  which  the 
case  admitted. 

Solomon  himself  attended  the  closing  services,  and 
provided  a  thousand  burnt-offerings  for  sacrifice  (1  Kings 
iii.  4).  The  Tabernacle  was  then,  presumably,  taken 
down  and  carried  to  Jerusalem,  where  its  golden  furniture 
furnished  models  for  similar  articles  to  be  constructed  by 
Hiram.  Having  served  this  purpose,  the  gold  of  which 
they  were  made  was  doubtless  melted  down  and  formed 
a  part  of  the  new  service  ;  it  being  a  principle  of  Hebrew 
ritual  that  anything  once  dedicated  to  the  service  of 
Jehovah  might  not  be  put  to  any  other  use. 

When  Solomon  returned  to  Jerusalem  he  presented 
himself  before  the  Tabernacle,  standing  in  the  porch 
thereof.  At  the  same  time  burnt-offerings  were  made 
on  Moriah,  for  which  doubtless  Zadok  the  priest  offered 
the  necessary  incense  before  the  altar  of  incense. 

Every  difficulty  had  now  been  overcome.  The  long 
reign  of  schism  was  ended.  The  time  was  ripe  for  the 
building  of  the  Temple.  The  plans  were  prepared,  the 
Temple  service  organized,  the  ground  levelled,  and  on  the 
2nd  day  of  the  month  Zif  (=  May)  the  building  was  begun 
(1  Kings  vi.  1). 

Seven  years  after  this  the  Temple  was  dedicated  to  the 


TABERNACLE    HISTORY    ENDED.        101 

service  of  Jehovah,  by  transferring  to  it,  with  great  pomp 
and  sacrificial  ceremony,  the  ark  and  the  tent  of  meeting 
and  all  the  holy  vessels  that  were  in  the  tent  on  Ophel 
(1  Kings  viii.  4).  These  last  were  placed  in  its  treasuries, 
the  ark  given  its  place  in  the  innermost  sanctuary,  while 
the  wood  of  the  Tabernacle  would  be  consumed  in  the 
fires  of  the  great  altar. 

Thus,  in  the  tenth  year  of  Solomon's  reign,  did  the 
Tabernacle  worship  cease  :  the  construction  of  Moses  in 
the  wilderness  having  served  the  purpose  of  God,  as  the 
place  of  meeting  with  man,  through  the  space  of  nearly 
three  hundred  years. ^ 


^  This  statement  is  made  upon  the  conclusion  that  the  480  years  of 
1  Kings  vi.  1  date  from  the  descent  into  Egypt,  and  not  from  the  Exodus. 

According  to  the  Septuagint  the  stay  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  was  one 
of  215  years.  This  gives  an  interval,  on  the  basis  above  suggested,  of 
265  years  between  the  Exodus  and  the  founding  of  the  Temple. 

From  Egyptian  chronology  we  learn  that  Ramases  II.,  the  Pharaoh  of 
the  oppression,  died  b.c.  1281.  There  were  no  Israelites  in  Canaan  when 
Ramases  III.  took  Hebron  and  other  tovms,  b.c.  1250-1230.  They  would 
be  then  in  the  Negeh. 

From  Babylonian  chronology  we  get  our  first  fixed  biblical  date,  which 
is  the  fall  of  Samaria  in  721  b.c.  Working  back  from  this  we  find  that 
Samuel  was  aUve  in  1050,  and  that  the  Temple  was  begun  about  1016  b.c. 


102 


THE   TABERNACLE. 


GENEALOGICAL    TABLE 
Or  THE  Family  of  Aaeon,  to  the  opening  of  Solomon's  Temple. 


The  names  giyen  in  capitals  are  those  of  men  known  to  have  been  anointed 
High-priests. 


AARON 

I 


I 
ELEAZAR 

1 
PHINEHAS 

ABISHUA 

BUKKI 

I 
UZZI 

! 
ZERAHIAH 

MERAIOTH  (1st) 

AZARIAH  (1st) 

Amariah 

Ahitub  (Ruler  of  the 
I    House  of  God) 
Meraioth  (2nd) 

ZADOK 

I 


Ithamar 

I 
o 

I 
o 

I 

o 

\ 

o 

I 

o 

I 

o 

ELI 

I 
PHINEHAS 

I 
Ahitub 


AHIMELECH  (=  AHIJAH,  AHIAH) 

I  (killed  by  Saul) 

ABIATHARi 


AHIMAAZ 

I 
AZARIAH  (2nd) 

JOHANAN 

I 
AZARIAH  (3rd) » 


Shalium 
(=  MeshaUum) 


I 
Ahimelech^  (=  Abimelech) 


"THE    SECOND    PEIEST."  103 

^  Deposed  by  Solomon  (1  Kings  ii.  27). 

2  I  do  not  think  that  the  theor}'  of  a  copyist's  thrice -repeated  transposition 
of  names  in  2  Sam.  viii.  17,  and  1  Chron.  xviii.  16  ;  ixiv.  6,  is  tenable,  but  to 
be  based  upon  a  non- apprehension  of  the  official  relations  which,  from  early 
times,  existed  between  the  High -priest  and  his  eldest  son. 

As  the  slightest  accidental  defilement — a  dream  is  given  in  the  Talmud  as 
an  instance— disqualified  the  actual  High-priest  from  officiating  on  the  great 
day  of  Atonement  and  at  the  festivals,  it  was  necessary  to  have  a  second 
High-priest  in  reserve,  prepared  to  take  his  place.  This  place  could  only  be 
taken  by  his  eldest  son,  as  the  prospective  High-priest. 

There  being  in  the  Law  no  age  fixed  as  that  at  which  the  sons  of  Aaron,  in 
the  direct  line,  were  to  enter  upon  their  duties,*  the  eldest  son  of  the  High- 
priest,  when  still  a  young  man,  was  often  associated  with  his  father  in  these 
responsibilities. 

Of  this  we  have  an  illustration  in  the  case  of  Abiathar,  who  in  Luke  ii.  26 
is  spoken  of  as  High -priest,  when  the  contemporary  histories  leave  us  in  no 
doubt  that  his  father  was  still  alive  and  held  office. 

So,  again,  with  Ahimelech,  who  assisted  Da\-id  in  the  formation  of  the 
priestly  courses  (1  Chron.  xxiv.  3).  He  was  the  son  of  the  Abiathar  jui^t 
mentioned,  and  was  given  the  name  of  his  murdered  grandfather.  At  the 
time  that  he  was  thus  engaged,  as  the  representative  of  the  house  of  Ithamar, 
his  father  still  lived,  and  survived  to  the  reign  of  Solomon  (1  Kings  ii.  27). 
If  we  reckon  a  second  Ahimelech,  who  fell,  with  the  deposition  of  his  father, 
under  Solomon's  edict,  there  is  not  any  need  to  alter  the  text  of  either  Samuel 
or  Chronicles,  but  '  Ahimelech  the  son  of  Abiathar '  may  stand  as  David's 
'priest,'  i.e.  High-priest,  during  his  father's  lifetime.  The  statement  that 
he  was  so  is  repeated  in  1  Chron.  xviii.  1 6,  though  in  this  passage  he  is 
called  Ahimelech. 

It  is  evident  that  in  cases  such  as  these,  contributory  causes  might  be  the 
ill-health  of  the  senior  member  of  the  family,  the  greater  capacity  of  the 
younger  member,  and  the  favour  of  the  reigning  sovereign  shown  toward  one 
person  rather  than  another. 

3  *  He  it  is  that  executed  the  priest's  office  in  the  temple  that  Solomon  built 
in  Jerusalem'  (1  Chron.  vi.  10). 

The  Chronicler  (1,  vi.  4-15),  having  traced  the  succession  of  High -priests 
down  to  Azariah  III . ,  abruptly  ends  the  line  with  the  above  note.     In  verse  1 1 


*  The  High-priest  Aristobulus,  after  having  officiated  in  the  Temple,  was 
murdered  by  Herod,  at  the  age  of  17  (Josephus,  War,  I.  xxii.  §  2). 


104  THE   TABERNACLE. 

he  resumes  the  line  of  succession  at  Azariah  I.,  and  traces  it  through  Shallum, 
the  second  son  of  Zadok,  to  the  time  of  the  Captivity.  This  is  confirmed  hy 
the  record  of  Ezra,  who  was  of  the  High -priestly  family  of  the  line  of  Shallum 
(vii.  1-5). 

From  the  fact  that,  for  the  hirthright  privileges  of  Shallum  and  his 
descendants,  the  Chronicler  went  back  seven  or  eight  generations  (from 
Azariah  III.  to  Azariah  I.),  the  inference  may  be  drawn  that  it  was  at  that 
point  that  the  line  of  ofl&eial  descent  had  been  broken  in  the  time  of  the 
Judges,  by  the  introduction  of  the  line  of  Ithamar  in  the  person  of  Eli. 


PAET     II. 

THE  TRIPLE  CUBIT  OF  BABYLONIA, 

WITH    RECONSTRUCTION    OF    THE 
SENKEREH    TABLET, 

AND 

RESTORATION    OF    THE    SCALE    OF    GUDEA. 


GLOSSARY 

OF    PRINCIPAL    CUNEIFORM    CHARACTERS    USED    IN 
THE    SENKEREH    TABLET. 


Numerals. 

Fraction  Signs. 

T 

= 

T. 

J.          = 

i 

TT    ... 

... 

2. 

I        ...      ■ 

..     "third." 

m  ... 

3- 

VI    ...  . 

•     i 

?f  or  V 

4. 

Hh    ...    . 

■     i 

v/  ... 

5- 

m  ...  • 

■     f 

YTY 

YYY       ••• 

6, 

Ilt   ...  . 

..     f 

W   ... 

7. 

m  ...  . 

..     f 

K?     ... 

VT 

8. 

ii?  ...  . 

..     i 

zzz 

Vvv        ... 
wv 

<   ... 

<T    ... 

9- 

Value  Signs. 

10. 
II. 

ST  5:1    . 

.     The  Sossus. 

TH     ...     . 

1,  sossi. 

<TT  •.• 

«    -. 

<«  ." 
^   ... 

^<<<   ... 

T     ■.. 

12. 

20. 

30- 

40. 

50- 
60. 

TtJ    ...    • 
ST  ...    • 
JffT  -    • 
5ST  ...    • 
^^-     . 

0 

..     The  Palm. 
..     3-palm  Ell. 
4-palm  Ell. 
..     5-palm  Ell. 
..     3-ell  Reed. 

^>      • 

. .     4-ell  Reed. 

Note. — B'or 

the  differing  values 

#«  ^>    • 

..     5 -ell  Reed. 

of  the  single  up 

right  wt 

idge,  see 

the 

Arithm 

ETiCAL  Sign. 

first  three  columns  of 

Diagram 

V. 

p.  ii6. 

0 

^  .-  . 

..     'and 'or  plus, 
rPTiresentec 

by  +. 

N.B. — In  the  subsequent  representation  of  each  of  the  four 
Columns  of  the  Tablet,  modern  characters  corresponding 
with  the  ancient  ones  are  placed  on  the  page  following. 
[107] 


COLUMN  I. 

THE   SENKEREH 

IDI-A 

T 

6. 

5. 

4. 

3. 

2. 

1. 

1 

A 

5 

*E1 

*m 

*T 

^T5:T 

TIT 

*m 

-m 

TT 

^T5^T 

TTT 

in 

^ 

TTT 

ST5=T 

TIT 

m 

^sf 

^ 

ET^T 

m 

m 

^11 

W 

^T5:T 

m 

10 

ILT 

^? 

Wf 

HS:T 

m 

HI 

^ 

YYTT 
YYY 

gT5:T 

m 

m 

•^ 

^  vvy 

*ET5iT 

m 

ILT 

^ 

^  vw 
vvv 

*ET5:I 

yyf 

B 

T 

*^ 

YYY 
YYY 

15 

RT 

*^ 

TT 

■-H    o    0} 

T+ 

*^ 

TTT 

ai  CO  oQ 

s? 

mr 

*^ 

?? 

< 

TT 

*^ 

??? 

^  f-i  ij 

<TT 

TTT 

*^ 

<TT 

5^  2 

<f  YW 

20 

V 

^ 

<m 

1^1 

<<?? 

V? 

■m 

«?? 

<« 

c 

•f 

TrJ 

o    ^   ^ 
£  *  o 

<« 

•f 

Tt; 

T 

^ 

ts"  . 

«<w 

*+ 

tt; 

*TT 

^ 

«« 

25 

*+ 

TrJ 

*TTT 

^ 

m  4J 
rtj    O    fl    0 

««w 

+ 

TtJ 

*?? 

m 

-ns 

<«« 

+ 

m 

*m 

^ 

m  r— 1     Ps.a 

«<TTT 
«rTlT) 

D 

T 

Tt; 

racteri 
.     Hoi 
sted  b 
tured 

T 

T 

+ 

TrJ 

S2  bo'5* 

T«< 

30 

*n 

*TtI 

ilgi 

TT 

•TT 

+ 

Tt; 

|2i 

TT«< 

Note.-— I.     The  character  in  parenthesis  ( )  in  line  27,  sub-column  i, 
[108]  is  superfluous. 


aRAi^iv.    MATHEMATICAL    TABLET,   obv. 


6 

5. 

4. 

3. 

2. 

1. 

Lines 

AP- 

+ 

ISO  I 

Sossi 

-3^ 

)) 

+ 

2 

» 

3 

+ 
+ 
+ 

4 

3 

3) 

3 

0 

3 

+ 

6 

)) 

3 

> 

+ 
4- 
4- 

7 
8 

9 

)) 

3 

3 

3 

lOj 

Soss 

6 

li 

+ 

2 

8 

li 

+ 

3 

9 

If 

+ 

4 

10 

2 

+ 

6 

12 

3 

+ 

I  2 

i8 

4 

+ 

i8 

24 

5 

+ 

24 

30 

4 

Palm 

30 

i 

» 

u. 

+ 

35 

i 

)j 

2 

+ 

40 

4 

)> 

3 

+ 

45 

4 

»> 

4 

+ 

50 

i 

)» 

5 

+ 

55 

I 

Palm 

I 

I 

4 

jj 

1  +  30 

II 

J) 

II 

II 

4 

j> 

n  +  30 

Notes. — 2.  The  conjectured  character  in  sub-cokimn  4,  line  14,  Section  B,  is 
omitted  as  superfluous.     3.  For  values  of  ^^i,  ^"3,  ^^'i,  and  ^^i,  see  Diagram  V.  p.  116. 

L109] 


COLUMN  II. 

THE    SENKEREH 

JDXA 

6. 

5. 

4. 

3. 

2. 

1. 

A 

V 

vw 
vw 

rO      t/5'S 

*5  >>© 

T 

vw 

3  2  -ii 

LC      0      U> 

YYY 

«?? 

^  s  <« 

TY 
vw 
wv 

5 

<« 

y 

y<^ 

ses   (  )    in    Sectioi 
ration   as   being   < 
original  and  5  are 

id  from  the  origin 

/c,  are  those  sugj 

those  conjecture 

< 

<yy 
« 

10 

y«< 

"2  "w  i-« 

0  3^  « 

<« 

yy 

0  c    ^ 
JS  £2  P 

:5g 

^ 

B 

15 

yy«< 
y 

yiT 

hv 

yy 

yyiT 

e   characters   within    p; 
I,    are   omitted   in   T: 
9  wedges  following  thei 
'linson. 

acters  in  solid  type  ar 

type  characters  wit/i 

son.     Hollow  characte 

y 

y 

yy 
yyy 

20 

yyxTf 

yyy 

yyyxf 

OTE.— Th 
column 
Of  the 
by  Raw 

•  B.— Char 
Hollow 
Rawlin 
Author. 

VYV 
VW 

yyyxrr 

^ 

iz; 

VW 

vw 

yyyy 

I 

VT 
WV 

VW 

vw 

C 

y 

*Pi 

^t- 

*«)y 

+ 

^ 

*«)yy 

25 

TtT 

^ 

^i^- 

*«)yyy 

TT? 

#« 

^^ 

*«)yyy+ 

y' 

#$ 

^i^- 

yyyy 

yw 

#« 

7Rr 

y  + 

#« 

i^5r- 

YYY 
YYY 

30 

yiyy 

#s 

^5^- 

??llTT 

yy? 

#« 

^J^- 

WlT 

yy 

#s 

^i^^ 

YYYY 
YYYY 

-yy^^ 

5k1 

5?I 

ST 

III 

=  Great 

=  Medium 

=  Small 

=  3  the 
number  of 

See  next 

Ell  of 

Ell  of 

Ell  of 

page. 

300  Soss. 

240  Soss. 

180  Soss. 

Reeds. 

[1,0] 


G-R-A^lS/r    III- 


MATHEMATICAL  TABLET. 


OBV. 


vEY.    No.  ofSossi. 

6. 

5. 

4.         3.    1       2. 

1. 

<  m 

3  =  3  X      I 

3 

I 

9=3  X      3 

9 

^  6  S 

3 

i5  =  3x      5 

15 

^.si 

5 

24=3  X      8 

24 

(A 

C3    Si    oj 

8 

30=3  X    10 

30 

,5    t«    OJ 

10 

36=3x    12 

36 

3  "rt  "S 

12 

45  =  3x    15 

45 

sii  . 

C    U    (U 

15 

60  =  3  X    20 

60 

^c2£- 

20 

75  =  3  X    25 

75 

25 

90=3  X    30 

90 

30 

I 

120  =  3  X    40 

120 

40 

150  =  3  X    50 

150 

50 

1 80  =  3  X    60 

l3 

[IP.] 

I 
[1+] 

240  —  3  X    80 

I* 

I  [digit] 

I 

300  =  3  X  100 

If 

2     „ 

360  =  3  X  120 

2 

[II  P.] 

3    » 

420  =  3  X  140 

2i 

4    » 

480  =  3  X  160 

2f 

5    » 

540=  3  X  180 

3 

[Ill  P.] 

6    „ 

2 

600  =  3  X  200 

34 

7    » 

660=3  X  220 

3f 

8    „ 

720  =  3  X  240 

4 

1 

3 

[IV  P.] 

9    » 

1 80  =  3  X    60 

1  [of  720] 

P^ 

5:- 

I 

360  =  3  X  1 20 

i 

Reed 

3-Ell 

II 

: 

540=  3  X  180 

f 

5) 

5) 

III 

630=3  X  210 

1 

)J 

)) 

IIIJ 

720  =  3  X  240 

I 

» 

)) 

IV 

960=3  X  320 

H 

)) 

J) 

V4 

1,080  =  3  X  360 

u 

J) 

)> 

VI 

1,200  =  3  X400 

If 

» 

» 

Vlf 

1,320  =  3  X  440 

If 

>) 

» 

VII4 

1,440  =  3  X480 

II 

)> 

„     [VIII  P. 

]  VIII 

2,160             720 

»— =  Palm   =    60               i|-rp 

otal     XII 

"  Palms. 

] 

_____             _^ 

■    y  =60x5  =  300 

1.                        

i  =60  X4=240 

^^  =  40x3=120—720x3=2160. 

15 


20 


25 


30 


COLUMN   III. 


THE    SENKEREH 


6. 

5. 

4. 

3. 

2. 

1. 

« 

1.1  il 

Is*  s 

ill 

6  a< 

m 
< 

<7? 

K< 

"  2  p< 

lisl 

« 

yy 

|S|! 

-51 

<« 

yy« 
yy«?? 

QD.— (  .*L 

yy  ^ 

A 

ti 

^W 

u 

m 

<yy 

M^y 

^?f?? 

III 

^ 

« 

*M5:y 

<« 
« 

III 

^ 

«???? 

*H:?:y 

'^<<n 

TtT 

^Sl 

<«??? 

£y5:y 

'<^'v 

H 

^ 

^^?? 

Ey^iy 

«<YYy 

«YYY 

III 

m 

wm 

ly^^y 

t?v/ 

y 

*^ 

y 

|*TT 

*^ 

y« 

y*+ 

*^ 

y«< 

|*|tT 

*^ 

y^« 

yy 

*^ 

yy 

yyy 

yyy 

V 

V 

V7 

trr 

TT 

y 

^ 

(X) 

w, 

y 

^ 

(x) 

zy 

■sis 

wr 

VYV 

T 

^ 

w 

iry 

^ 

VYY 
VYV 

YT 

T 

^ 

w 

iyyy 

■43 

VYV 
VYV 

VYV 

y 

^ 

w 

I?? 

"sS 

< 

y 

#* 

w 

u/ 

-m 

<y 

yy 

#« 

(-f) 

<yy 

Notes. — i.  The  4  characters  within  square  brackets  on  line  16  are  deemed  to  be 
superfluous.  2.  The  conjectured  fractions  in  sub-column  6,  lines  18  and  20,  are 
replaced  by  others  in  the  left  panel.  3.  The  5  conjectured  characters  in  Section  C, 
sub-column  5,  are  found  to  be  unnecessaiy. 

[.12] 


b^RA3yc  II.    MATHEMATICAL    TABLET,    obv. 


KEY. 

Number  of  Sossi. 


20  =  4  X 

40  =  4  X 
60  =  4  X 
80  =  4  X 
100  =  4  X 
120  =  4  X 
140  =  4  X 
144  =  4  X 
160  =  4  X 

180  =  4  X 
192  =  4  X 
200  =  4  X 
208  =  4  X 
216  =  4  X 
224  =  4  X 
232  =  4  X 


3 

10 

15 

20 

25 
30 

35 
S6 
40 

45 
48 

50 
52 
54 
56 
58 


60 
80 
90 


240  =  4  X 
320  =  4  X 
360=4  X 
400  =  4  X  1 00 
480  =  4  X  120 
720  =  4  X  180 
960  =  4  X  240 
[,200  =  4  X  300 


[,440  =  4  X  360 
[,680  =  4  X  420 
[,920  =  4  X  480 
J,  160  =  4  X  540 
j,40o  =  4  X  600 
640  =  4  X  660 
5,880  =  4  X  720 


6. 

5. 

4. 

3. 

2. 

1. 

20 

5 

40 

10 

60 

15 

So 

20 

100 

25 

120 

30 

140 

35 

144 

36 

160 

40 

Small  Ell. 

45 

,, 

+ 

12 

Sossi 

48 

» 

+ 

20 

> 

50 

j> 

+ 

28 

J 

52 

)j 

+ 

36 

, 

54 

,, 

+ 

44 

) 

56 

jj 

+ 

52 

> 

58 

I  [Me.  E.] 

I  [Palm] 

li      „ 

I  +  20 

'■2         » 

I  +  30 

If        » 

I  4-40 

2         „ 

II 

3       „ 

III 

4       » 

IV 

5       „ 

V 

I 

^ 

> 

VI 

1 

Reed 

4-Ell 

i[of720] 

+ 

VII 

I 

» 

f 

+ 

VIII 

I 

M 

.3 

+ 

IX 

I 

)J 

J 

4- 

X 

I 

)l 

f 

+ 

XI 

II 

M 

XII 

30 


["3] 


COLUMN   IV. 


THE    SENKEREH 


3DI-A.- 


30 


6.       i 

5. 

4.       i 

3. 

2-  i 

1. 

« 

V 

«w 

TrJt 

w 

<« 

Tt; 

yf? 

«<^ 

U 

wv 

<«< 

n 

YYV 
VVV 

YY 

^^w 

u 

m 

'^ 

m 

<       \ 

f<<77 

n 

<T        1 

T 

^1 

<TT 

T 

>W<I 

< 

m 

A> 

T 

>?kT 

« 

111 

\TTT 

T 

>5<i 

<« 

Tri 

*i  >^« 

/YVY 
<VYY 

T 

>=Ff<I 

'i' 

TrJ 

« 

T 

>Jk! 

« 

Tt; 

«TT 

TT 

>^T 

3  ?«"« 

«V 

TTT 

>5<T 

•<  o)     *prt 

op  pj    CJ 

«<?R 

JiJI 

^1? 

i  »  £ 

^>^YYV 

<      YY 

T 

Wr 

.5<T 

0    OJ    0    fi 

tM 

T<rY 

W 

>wT 

5^/^  > 

•Pi 

!«V 

ffi 

4ki 

0     "^ 

0,  Q  g 

T«<  ^y 

p^-^ 

2  0  0  (d 

+ 

#« 

i^^ 

-111 

M       ^ 

^h 

ITT        1 

#« 

^ 

^^- 
^J^- 

-Is 

.3-33 

V        ! 

V 

^ 

t^^ 

-f,  -o  ^  t5  '^ 

Iti 

«?        ; 

^ 
#« 
#« 

^i^ 

■r-^*" 

^t- 

n 

< 

W? 

^ 

^t- 

1 

!B 

<T 

n 

#« 

^c- 

<TT 

E<3 

N 

V  HT 

^T;^ 

[■h] 


(3-TIA.IMl    X.      I> 

/lA  1  Mt 

.iVIA 

I  IL/AL.      1  i 

HDL.tI. 

1     •                 ^^  ^ 

KEY.   No.  ofSossi. 

6. 

5. 

4. 

3.      ,2 

.               1. 

20  =  5  X      4 

20 

1 

4 

I 

25  =  5  X      5 

25 

tt;  I 

5 

30  =  5  X      6 

30 

Of  Palm' 

6 

35  =  5x      7 

35 

)> 

7 
8     : 

40  =  5  X      8 

40 

)> 

5 

45  =  5  X      9 

45 

)) 

9 

50  =  5  X    10 

50 

» 

10 

55  =  5  X    II 

55 

Sossi 

j) 

II 

1 

60=5  X    12 

I  P 

>w< 

T         - 

12    ! 

70=  5  X    14 

I 

InGt. 

Ell     [  +  ]  10 

)) 

14 

10 

80=5  X    16 

I 

)} 

[  +  ]20 

J) 

16 

90=  5  X    18 

I 

» 

[  +  ]30 

)) 

18 

100=  5  X    20 

I 

„ 

[  +  ]40 

» 

20 

110  =  5  X    22 

I 

» 

[+]  50 

)> 

22 

120=  5  X    24 

2 

)} 

24 

15 

180=  5  X    36 

3 

}) 

36 

240  =  5  X    48 

4 

J) 

48 

300  =  5  X    60 

,      5 

J) 

[iGt.Ell] 

I  [Palm] 

360=5  X    72 

6 

J) 

[li    „    ] 

1+12 

420  =  5  X    84 

7 

» 

[If    .    ] 

1  +  24 

20 

480  =  5  X    96 

8 

)) 

[I*    .    ] 

1  +  36 

540=  5  X  108 

9 

)) 

[H   »  ] 

1+48 

600=  5  X  120  [  J  [of  18003 

^ 

$               i^ 

II 

900=  5  X  180  1  J      „ 

Re 

ed         5-Ell 

III 

1,200  =  5  X  240    1 

J) 

jj 

IV 

25 

1,500=5x300    1      „ 

1) 

)> 

V 

1,800=  5   X  360  i   I[Gt.Reed] 

>) 

)) 

VI 

2,400  =  5  X  480    I J     „ 

» 

>) 

VIII 
IX 

2,700=5x540      IJ       „ 

)) 

)) 

3,000  =  5  X  600    If     „ 

)) 

)) 

X 

3C 

3.300=5  X  660    If     „ 

)) 

» 

XI 

3,600  =  5  X 

720  ^  II       „ 

}j 

M 

XII 

E=5  = 

1 

Jpp  =  3  =  mult 

iplier. 

^  =  4  =  multiplier. 

^^^  6,  each  > 

■^each=36o  x  ^  =  2  ' 

multiplier 

360  X  6  =  2 

r6o. 

=  720-r-^=  10  =  72 
X-g  40  =  2880. 

1  =  3600. 

^1  =  ? 

Colophon 

[v  =  2]  Duplicate. 

[■■5] 


k:    O 

12:  ^ 


CO 


w 

r/^ 

w 

<; 

H 

H 

^ 

W 

o 

h-! 

PP 

CO 

-t1 

f^ 


> 


>■ 

s 

t^  (N  '^ 

(M  (M 

(M 

c<< 

s 

,-1  (>1  ,-1  oo 

coca 

(M 

CO 

3 

^cicL^ 

CD  OS 

OS 

CO 

r-l    ,-( 

'"' 

Csl 

SJ 

'o 

"o 

o 

o 

"-&? 

"? 

^ 

1— 1 

> 

KH 

5 

^— -.,-—— ' 

v_ 

CO  o 

M 

t«' 

^  <M  OS 

.-1       CO 

-* 

,_! 

l-« 

a> 

1    1    1 

CO        r-H 

<M 

CO 

IH 

.9 

,-H    OO    r-l 

1              1 

1 

o 

hJ 

1— ( 

t^    o 

t^ 

lO 

111 

w.— 

■— ' 

<M 

"o 

1-^ 

pq 

u 

O 

1— 1 

o 

^ 

M 

'"*      >■ 

w  ^ 

> 

> 

P5 

M 

3 

■ . 

"  " ""' 

^■^^ 

"^^ 

■""'^"" 

« 

. 

ai 

(M    r.^ 

<N  CO  CO  (M 

ca 

is 

►H 

— 

r-l    ^M 

<M  ^      1    (N 

CO 

CO       CO 

u 

M 

2 

1     r 

1            CO      1 

CO 

CO         1 

o 

a 

1-3 

,-H    ^ 

Tt<          (M  CO 

CO 

o 

1 

I— 1 

^  ^--^ 

(M 

O 

O 

1— 1 

1— ( 

M      1— 1      ^s- 

fc 

,           h- ( 

>H 

-^ 

s«^ 

tp 

CO    — '    r^    CO 

I-- 

i-H 

»-H 

a; 

^    CO    Cq    r-l 

cq 

C^ 

CO 

a 

'►3 

1        1        i        1 
lO  lO  >0  lO 

CO 

i 

^ 

1 

d 

I— 1 

<N 

C<1 

^ 

"o 

rA 

o 

o 

1— 1      1—1 1—1 

> 

1— 1 

)_( 

1— < 

K^a^ 

^ 

> 

s 

CO 

^""^ 

"""o^ 

""^^ 

"""^ 

"™~" 

<: 

^ 

p 
o 

da 

^ 

>n       «D 

r- 

00 

K 

r  r  ^i 

*~ 

o 

^      *~      *~ 

*~ 

V 

*~" 

*^ 

E-i 

00         to 

>t 

M 

,T 

Q 

w 

^ 

3 

> 

of  Palm 
of  Palm 
of  Palm 

B 

B 

B    1    . 

a 

a  9 

^ 

s 

> 

Ph 

Ph 

^   1  1 

'S   1  ^ 

I 

§1 

C3 

3 

i^  HS  HS 

12  H2 

-* 

CO 

CO 

;    :    : 

: 

■4^ 

: 

. 

. 

"So      . 

. 

S5 

B 

• 

fi    •    • 

• 

•         • 

o 

:      '.    "^ 

a 

ine 

ossus       ..  ,      . 
wentieth  of  P 

1 

B 

3 

o 

g 

hird  of  Palm 
he  Palm 
mall  Ell...     . 

■4- 

a 
IS 

-5- 
W    p^ 

^   a 

a 
1 

1 

p^ 

& 

oi 

j    h^     02     H 

H 

H 

^    ^    ai 

^ 

H^      J» 

^ 

h^l 

["6] 


H 


l&^ 

>J^ 

^  a  . 

i-t      r-i 

S|« 

Double 
Small 
Reed. 

- 

-!«     PJlM 

^TJ 

^ 

H-o 

.-1      (N 

ts  « 

^35 

£    • 

^ 

-:. 

-c, 

-o  « 

S"" 

^^.i 

-iM 

^J!co 

m!m    -'m 

1— 1 

■— 1 

I-H 

(>» 

(M      CO 

^  a  s 

aPi 

£>  . 

wl>o 

■*<«o 

-*o 

kNo 

sa 

'-' 

CO 

^ 

CO 

t^ 

0      (M 

S 

-^Hf 

>-«?< 

'-'^J 

^^ 

CO 

t^ 

a> 

C^l      10 

■ss 

§ 

^ 

r^ 

o}n 

es_- 

l-H 

CO 

00 

0 

■M 

CO     0 

S3 

—.       (M 

a 

--3 

^ 

CO 

"■^ 

U2 

00 

"<*< 

0 

CO 

00      0 

r-i 

<M 

CO 

CO 

■*      CO 

(^ 

'S.„s 

,_, 

CO 

0 

CN 

10 

-* 

C<l 

0 

00 

TtH         0 

U3 

r- 

0 

0 

-*       00 

3  o* 

l-H         1—1 

H      Cu 

f.a 

r^lco 

C 

I— 1 

CO 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0    0 

S  c  73 

CO 

lO 

00 

0 

CO 

00    0 

H      ft- 

(M 

CO 

CO 

Tii       CO 

.a 

S=.s 

,_, 

H^.O 

-* 

(M 

CO 

00 

0 

CO 

00 

0 

(M 

CO      0 

g  ="3 

CO 

CO 

QO 

CO 

CO 

t^     (N 

^     ^ 

04 

(M 

CO 

-<*l 

10    t^ 

i-i    10 

<X> 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0  CO 

0 

0  CO 

0   0 

03 

<M 

CO 

00 

-* 

0  (NCO 

-<*< 

00      0 

(N 

CO  ^o 

-^ 

CO       CO 

^ 

'-' 

-i>4 

■M       CO 

-H       CO       kC 

00 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0    0 

a 

«o 

00 

"<*< 

(N 

0 

'^ 

Csl 

0 

00 

-f    0 

1—1 

W5 

t— 

cs 

(M 

CO 

-* 

-* 

CO      00 

CO 

■^ 

«5 

CO 

00   0 

:      :      : 

: 

: 

•XJ      • 

•      •     g 

I 

<4H 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

1 

^  1 

a  p^ 

- 

§ 
•5 

:      :   f^ 
0 

B 
I 

: 

§ 

J 

1 

-% 
^ 

03 

a 

rn 

II 

b 

g 

;      :    rS 

0 

0 

: 

W 

a 

N 

P^ 

B 

Ph 

Qi 

<D        35 

Q 

•s   i   ^ 

1 

B 

"rt 

fl 

1 

a 

"i 
g 

& 

0 

0     c 

< 

h^     OQ     H 

H 

H 

f^ 

M 

>-l 

OJ 

h-l 

w 

p  « 

H<M 

Hm 

""^ 

[I '7] 


118 


CHAPTER   I. 

OE"  THE  RECONSTEUCTION"  OF  THE 
SENKEREH  TABLET. 


IT  is  deeply  interesting  to  know  how  men's  minds  worked 
when  the  world  was  young.  And  it  is  to  Babylonia 
— the  cradle  of  the  human  race — that  we  must  go  for 
some  evidence  of  this.  The  low  alluvial  plains  at  the 
head  of  the  Persian  Gulf  are  covered  with  the  remains 
of  primitive  cities,  palaces,  temples,  and  cemeteries ;  from 
one  of  which,  fifty  years  ago,  was  disinterred  the  little 
slab  of  unbaked  clay  which  is  now  to  engage  our  attention, 
as  embodying  the  world's  earliest  known  arithmetical 
system. 

Senkereh  is  a  small  Arab  village  standing  on  the  site 
of  the  ancient  city  of  Larsam  or  Larsa,  in  Southern 
Babylonia.  Not  far  away  from  its  series  of  mounds  are 
the  ruins  of  AYarka — the  Erech  of  Genesis  x.  10 — and  of 
Mukayyar,  once  the  home  of  the  Patriarch  Abram.  Here, 
in  1850,  Mr.  W.  K.  Loftus  discovered  a  great  number  of 
tombs  containing  baked  -  clay  tablets  and  pottery,  the 
former  with  rude  Cuneiform  inscriptions  impressed  upon 
one   or  both  sides.^      His   most  valuable   discovery   was 

^  Chaldea  and  Susiana,  1857,  p.  255. 


HISTORY    OF    THE    TABLET.  119 

a  *  table  of  squares/  which,  with  the  late  Sir  Henry 
Rawlin son's  aid,  was  seen  to  confirm  the  statement  of 
Berosus  the  Chaldean,  that  the  Babylonians  made  use 
of  a  sexagesimal  notation,  the  unit  of  which  was  termed 
a  sossicSy  as  well  as  of  a  decimal  notation. 

The  early  investigations  into  the  contents  of  this  tablet 
were  confined  to  its  reverse  side,  which  is  in  a  state  of 
almost  perfect  preservation,  and  which,  from  its  geo- 
metrical method,  is  of  comparatively  easy  comprehension. 
Its  other  side,  the  obverse,  is  in  much  worse  condition, 
nearly  one  -  half  of  its  figures  and  ideographs  being 
flaked  away. 

Under  Sir  Henry  Rawlin son's  editorship  the  Trustees 
of  the  British  Museum  published  a  transcription  of  the 
tablet  in  Plate  37  of  the  fourth  volume  of  their  *  Cuneiform 
Inscriptions  of  Western  Asia,'  the  second  edition  of  which 
appeared  in  1891.^  The  possible  value  of  this  tablet  was 
early  recognized.  In  1868  Lenormant  issued  his  *  Essai 
sur  un  Document  Mathematique,'  and  in  1877  Professor 
Lepsius,  of  Berlin,  published  a  monograph  upon  it,  which 
may  be  seen  in  the  library  of  the  Society  of  Biblical 
Archaeologists.  Beside  these,  many  other  attempts  were 
made  to  restore  the  missing  figures,  and  to  read  the 
riddle  of  this  literary  sphinx.  Hommel  well  expressed 
the  general  conviction  of  Assy riolo gists  when  he  wrote 
(Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  i.  218,  article 
Babylonia),  '  On  the  reverse  of  the  tablet  of  Senkereh 
are  given  the  squares  and  cubes  of  the  cubit  from  the 
No.  1  up  to  60  [this  is  a  clerical  error  for  40],  and  on 

1  The  tablet  itself  is  numbered  92,698,  and  is  in  the  British  Museum. 


120  THE   TABERNACLE. 

the  obverse  the  fractions  and  multiples  of  the  cubit.' 
This  much  was  perceived,  but  no  more.  Its  reconstruction 
still  remained  for  others  to  accomplish.  The  result  to  be 
attained  seemed  so  exceedingly  desirable  that  several 
months  of  application  have  enabled  me  to  present  an 
exposition  of  the  obverse  side  of  the  tablet,  which, 
though  not  complete  to  the  smallest  detail,  still  is  so 
far  consistent  and  harmonious  with  the  existing  im- 
pressions of  the  stylus  as,  I  believe,  to  merit  general 
acceptance. 

When  it  is  stated  that  each  side  of  the  tablet  has  a 
surface  for  writing  of  about  six  inches  square  (7J  x  5 j 
inches),  and  that  285  separate  characters  are  still  found 
on  the  obverse,  and  that  these  require  the  addition  of  an 
almost  equal  number  which  have  been  efiaced,  in  order 
to  complete  the  system,  it  will  be  seen  that  enormous 
difficulties  have  already  been  overcome  in  its  transcription. 
The  difficulties  must  have  been  insuperable  but  for  the  use 
of  the  microscope,  a  magnifying-glass  having  been  almost 
certainly  used  in  its  construction.  Why  a  work  of  such 
care  and  elaboration  should  not  have  been  hardened  by 
being  baked,  is  one  of  those  questions  which  it  is  easy  to 
ask  and  impossible  to  answer. 

Coming  now  to  the  contents  of  the  tablet,  we  find  that 
our  first  duty  is  to  divide  it  horizontally  into  sections 
and  longitudinally  into  sub-columns.  This  involves,  of 
course,  some  acquaintance  with  its  contents  and  with  the 
value  of  each  of  its  characters.  This  done,  we  find  that 
there  are,  in  each  of  its  four  columns,  six  sub-columns, 
the  number  of  sections  in  each  being  either  three  or  four. 


SE]^KEEEH    TABLET    COLUMNS.         121 

Column  I,  [Diagram  IV.)} 

The  first  column  is  found  to  represent  a  series  of 
arithmetical  progressions,  and  is  not,  as  are  the  other 
three,  a  column  of  multiplication,  with  the  multiplier 
unexpressed.  In  extent  it  ranges  from  the  smallest 
length-measure,  that  of  the  liney  to  half  of  each  of  the 
ells  contained  in  the  following  columns.  The  way  in 
which  this  minutest  fraction  is  expressed  is  a  very 
ingenious  one.  Three  sossi  are  taken,  and  are  repeated 
through  nine  lines.  This  is  done  in  sub -column  I, 
and  their  equivalents  in  writing  are  set  down  opposite 
to  them  in  sub-column  6.  Between  these  two  rows  of 
characters,  and  in  sub-column  3,  there  are  impressed  the 
gradual  and  progressive  values  of  nine  lines  (Section  A), 
with  the  sign  for  addition  connecting  them  with  the 
written  figures  to  their  left.  The  third  line  on  the  fifth 
diagram  (p.  116)  shows  that,  with  the  exception  of  the 
great  ell,  this  is  the  only  instance  in  which  a  written 
figure  was  taken  to  express  a  whole  number  or  a  fraction 
of  a  whole  number ;  the  idea  to  be  conveyed  being  that 
three  sossi  were  one-twentieth  of  a  palm,  a  measure 
which  could  hardly  have  been  distinguished  in  any 
other  way  than  by  having  its  own  ideograph.  This 
ideograph  occurs  only  here  in  the  tablet. 

In  this  way  six  sossi  are  reached,  and  the  first  section 
is  complete,  it  having  been  shown  that  there  are  three 
*  lines  *  to  each  sossus. 

1  In  an  independent  study  of  the  Senkereh  tablet  it  will  be  found  advisable 
to  take  the  diagrams  in  the  order  of  their  numeration,  1  to  4,  rather  than 
that  of  the  columns. 


122  THE   TABERNACLE. 

In  Section  B  the  progression  is  a  decimal  one,  and  tlie 
later  figures  move  forward  in  tenths  of  a  palm.  In 
Section  C  the  progression  is  a  duodecimal  one,  and  the 
figures  move  forward  in  twelfths  of  a  palm.  To  each  of 
these  sections  the  value  of  half  a  palm  is  devoted,  and 
the  table  has  now  arrived  at  its  true  summit  and  goal, 
which  was  to  ehow  the  whole  palm,  as  hand-breadth, 
with  all  its  accompanying  fractions,  except  its  principal 
one,  which  was  reserved  for  Column  II.,  where  it  appears 
on  lines  14-22.^ 

Before  closing  the  record,  however,  the  scribe  inserted 
another  section,  D,  in  order  to  show  the  relation  which 
the  palm  bore  to  the  subsequent  columns.  The  palm  of 
60  sossi  is  therefore  given  as  1^,  2,  and  2\  palms,  thus 
leading  us  insensibly  to  its  further  developments,  as  now 
to  be  indicated. 

Cohmn  IL  {Diagram  III.). 

This  is  a  column  of  multiplication,  and  is  comparable 
to  the  second  column  in  an  ordinary  multiplication  table. 
Apart  from  the  fact  of  the  multiplier  3  being  unexpressed, 
and  from  the  bad  condition  of  the  upper  part  of  the 
Cuneiform,  it  presents  few  difficulties. 

In  one  respect,  indeed,  it  difiers  from  those  following, 
and  this  singularity  merits  a  moment's  consideration. 
It  is  this  : — Whereas  the  multiplicand  in  each  of  the 
Columns  II.,  III.,  and  lY.  is  the  same,  namely,  twelve 
palms  variously  arranged  and  expressed,  in  Column  II. 

1  It  will  not  escape  notice  that  the  details  of  the  digit  in  Section  B  are 
followed  by  their  use  in  the  fractions  of  Section  C,  Column  II. 


SENKEREH    TABLET    COLUMNS.         123 

the  working-out  of  the  system  is  divided  into  two  main 
divisions.  In  the  former  of  these  four  palms  are  dealt 
with,  in  minute  fractions,  and  are  multiplied  into  small 
ells,  each  ell  being  of  the  length  of  three  palms.  In  the 
latter.  Section  C,  eight  palms  are  dealt  with  in  larger 
fractions,  the  total  of  both  divisions  being  12  palms  each 
of  60  sossi  X  3  =  2,160,  a  figure  which  is  recorded  at  the 
foot  of  the  column. 

Columns  III.  and  IV.  {Diagrams  II.  and  I.). 

In  these  columns  the  unexpressed  multipliers  are  4  and 
5  respectively,  and  with  this  key  in  his  hand  any  scholar 
will  be  able  to  test  for  himself  the  correctness  of  the 
conclusions  given  and  that  of  the  restored  figures.  One 
item  only  of  these  columns  needs  to  be  referred  to  here. 
They,  in  common  with  Column  II.,  are  worked  out  to 
a  higher  denomination  than  ells.  When  a  certain 
number  of  ells  had  been  reached,  the  system  developed 
into  one  of  reeds,  just  as  with  us  inches  become  feet  and 
feet  become  yards.  Unfortunately,  the  distinguishing 
mark  of  these  reeds  (i.e.  that  by  which  they  were  known 
one  from  another)  has  been  efiaced  in  all  but  one  of  the 
columns.  The  missing  characters  have  been  conjecturally 
restored  in  the  left-hand  panels  of  the  diagrams,  but  these 
have  no  accepted  authority,  except  in  Coliunn  IV. 

The  Fractions  of  the  Tablet. 

One  of  the  most  fascinating  aspects  of  the  tablet  is  the 
way  in  which  its  fractions  are  expressed.     Of  these  there 


124  THE   TABERNACLE. 

are  a  great  number,  and  they  afford  us  a  simpler  con- 
ception of  the  mathematical  attainments  of  primitive  man 
than  can  be  got  in  any  other  way.  The  fractions  used  are 
these :  J,  ^,  J,  |,  -J,  |-,  and  J.  The  improper  fractions  -J, 
•|,  and  -§-  are  also  used.  For  the  mode  of  their  expression 
I  must  refer  to  a  later  page,  where  it  will  be  seen  that 
a  horizontal  wedge,  cut  in  half  by  an  upright  wedge, 
is  the  sign  for  J,  and  that  this  simple  principle  of  the 
ocular  demonstration  of  the  fraction  intended  obtains 
throughout  the  whole  series. 

I  may  take  leave  to  doubt  whether,  either  the  actual 
finger-breadth  or  the  finger-length  is  ever  here  referred 
to  as  a  factor  of  the  palm,  which,  it  will  hardly  be  denied, 
was  the  '  fundamental  *  of  this  whole  system  of  length- 
measures.  Taking  the  palm  as  the  original  from  which 
all  other  measures  were  derived,  the  tablet  shows  that  six 
lesser  lengths  were  derived  from  it,  and  that  it  was 
multiplied  into  six  greater  lengths.  Amongst  these 
twelve  derivations  the  finger  does  not  appear !  What 
does  appear,  and  what  for  convenience  has  been  termed 
a  'digit,'  on  nine  lines  of  Column  II.,  is  one-third  of 
a  palm,  each  unit  being  of  the  value  of  twenty  sossi. 
These  I  take  to  have  been  adopted  as  the  conventional 
length  of  the  fore-joint  of  the  thumb,  which  is  ordinarily 
about  one-third  of  the  width  of  the  palm,  and  may  have 
been  commonly  used  in  a  sparse  population  (as  was  the 
hand-breadth)  for  purposes  of  measurement.  Disputes 
arising  from  this  unscientific  method  would  early  compel 
the  conventionalization  of  both  measures. 

A  tribute  of  respect  is  due  to  the  dead-and-gone  sages 


POINTS    FROM    THE    TABLET.  125 

who,  some  five  thousand  years  ago,  worked  out  for  them- 
selves, and  for  us,  this  system  of  arithmetic.  With  only 
their  right  hand  to  guide  them,  they  elaborated  a  system 
which  in  many  respects  is  superior  to  that  in  use  amongst 
oul-selves.  For  theirs  was  at  once  decimal  and  duodecimal, 
and  in  their  monetary  system  there  could  not  have  been 
the  anomaly  of  having  twelve  pence  in  a  shilling  and 
twenty  shillings  in  a  pound  without  any  power  of  simple 
co-ordination. 

How  closely  they  adhered  to  the  human  hand  as  the 
source  and  embodiment  of  their  whole  system  may  be  seen 
in  their  appropriation  of  its  five  fingers  to  differing  uses. 
One  was  the  symbol  of  unity  or  completeness,  and  is  used 
in  twelve  different  relations  on  the  face  of  the  tablet,  as 
shown  in  diagram  No.  Y.  Two  was  used  for  all  purposes 
of  duplication.  Thus  there  were  single  reeds  and  double 
reeds  of  three  varieties.  The  remaining  integers,  3,  4, 
and  5,  when  multiplied  together,  gave  them  the  60  which 
Berosus  chronicled,  and  which,  being  divisible  either  by 
10  or  12,  gave  them  in  the  sexagesimal  system  of  notation 
a  more  simple  and  elastic  system  than  our  decimal  one. 

"What  I  think  may  be  considered  as  having  been 
established  by  the  present  reading  of  the  Senkereh  tablet 
are  these  three  points.  That  in  the  system  which  it 
represents — 

(1)  The  breadth  of  the  hand-pahn  (conventionalized)  was 
the  fundamental  of  all  length-fneasures. 

(2)  That  there  were  three  ell-lengths  in  simultaneous  use, 
each  probably  in  a  different  department  of  trade,  like  our 
oivn  Troy  and  Avoirdupois  tveights. 


126  THE    TABERNACLE. 

(3)  That  the  relation  of  these  ells  to  one  another  was  the 
relation  of  3,  4,  and  5  ;  these  having  been  the  number  of 
palms  of  which  they  respectively  consisted, 

2. 

Having  thus  given  a  bird's-eye  view  of  the  construction 
of  the  restored  Senkereh  tablet,  and  a  brief  summary  of 
the  conclusions  to  be  drawn  from  it,  it  is  now  necessary 
to  go  over  the  field  again  with  more  especial  reference 
to  the  arithmetical  signs  used,  and  to  the  characters,  other 
than  figures,  which  appear  on  its  face. 

The  numerals  themselves  do  not  detain  us,  as,  with 
one  or  two  exceptions,^  they  are  not  more  difficult  of 
comprehension  than  are  the  later  Roman  figures,  but 
the  mode  in  which,  the  fractions  are  expressed  is  not 
undisputed.  To  this,  therefore,  a  brief  space  may  be 
given. 

In  the  system  by  which  the  various  fractions  of  a  whole 
number  were  at  the  first  made  visible  to  the  eye,  and 
given  an  abiding  permanency,  we  have  the  solution  of 
a  deeply  interesting  problem.  In  order  to  attain  these 
ends,  the  original  method  w^ould  seem  to  have  been  that 
of  taking  a  single  wedge,  which  was  throughout  the 
emblem  of  unity,  and  by  treating  it  as  such  to  convey 
to  the  mind,  through  the  eye,  the  desired  idea.  This 
foundation  wedge  was  generally  treated  horizontal!}', 
there   being   thus   but   one   step  from   the   work  of  the 

^  Of  these  exceptions  that  for  19  is  the  most  unusual.  It  does  not  occur  on 
the  ohverse  of  the  tablet.  The  distinction  between  4  and  40  is  thus  attained : 
^  =  4,  4^  =  40.      See  Glossary,  p.  107. 


TABLET    FRACTION    SIGNS.  127 

hewer-of-wood  to  that  of  the  ideal  of  the  artist  in  clay. 
So  placed,  the  prostrate  unit  was  '  cut  up  *  into  its 
various  component  parts,  and  thus  the  intended  effect 
was  produced.  The  earliest  applicatioa  of  this  principle 
naturally  would  be  to  divide  a  single  wedge  into  its 
*  halves ' ;  and  to  do  this  in  such  a  way  as  that  a  person 
at  a  distance,  seeing  the  graphy  would  know  what  was 
intended. 

The  series  would  then  be  as  follows  : — 

(1)  >f  =  i- 

This  sign  occurs  in  each  of  the  four  columns  of  the 
tablet,  and  has  everywhere  the  same  relative  value,  that 
value  being  one  moiety  of  some  whole  number,  generally 
that  of  the  one  preceding  it ;  e.g.,  in  Column  II.,  line  24, 
the  *  half '  is  that  of  the  immediately  preceding  total  of 
720  sossi.  In  Column  III.,  line  19,  the  'half  is  that 
of  the  medium  ell  of  240  sossi,  to  which  the  whole  section 
is  devoted.  In  Column  lY.,  lines  24  and  29,  it  is  one 
'half  of  the  great  reed  of  1,800  sossi,  to  the  growth 
of  whicli  the  whole  section  is  devoted.  As,  however, 
Assyriologists  are  in  full  accord  as  to  the  meaning  of  this 
sign,  there  is  no  need  to  say  more  about  it. 

(2)  i=- third:  ;[j  =  j.  jjT  =  f- 

This  character,  J,  when  unassociated  with  any  other, 
occurs  but  once  on  the  face  of  the  tablet.  This  is  in 
Column  II.,  line  22,  where  its  undisputed  appearance 
furnishes  indubitable  evidence  and  plays  a  most  important 
part  in  the  elucidation  of  the  column.     For  we  have  here 


128  THE    TABEEIN'ACLE. 

the  singular  result  that  while  the  whole  column  is  based 
upon  a  multiplicand  of  12  palms  (as  are  the  others),  and 
works  out  by  multiplication  to  a  total  of  reeds  (as  do  the 
other  columns),  yet  we  have  in  this  single  character 
a  suggestion  of  a  division  of  its  contents  (other  than 
the  usual)  into  two  parts  of  one  and  two  reeds.  The 
presence  of  this  sign  shows  that  its  first  division  consisted 
of  but  one-third  of  the  whole.  Had  this  single  figure 
been  effaced  by  time,  I  do  not  see  how  the  tablet  could 
have  been  perfectly  reconstructed. 

In  all  other  parts  of  the  tablet  the  J^  is  accompanied  by 
one  or  more  index  figures  following  it,  to  show  how  many 
*  thirds '  were  intended.  This  is  indicated  by  a  number 
of  perpendicular  wedges,  which  tell  us  w^hether  one  or  two 
thirds  are  to  be  taken  into  account. 

In  Column  III.,  lines  26-30,  this  system  is  still  further 
extended,  so  as  to  reach  the  improper  fraction  of  five- 
thirds,  tbese  being  the  fractions,  in  ells,  of  which  the 
medium  reed  consisted  before  it  reached  the  second  unit. 
Four  of  these  five  characters  are  in  the  original,  one  only 
requiring  to  be  added  by  conjecture. 

(3)  m  =  f . 

This  sign  occurs  but  once  on  the  face  of  the  tablet  as 
the  equivalent  of  three-quarters  of  a  whole  number.  It 
is  found  in  Column  II.,  line  25,  as  one  of  a  series  of  pro- 
gressive fractions,  and  being  in  such  good  company  its 
respectability  can  hardly  be  doubted.  Its  normal  con- 
struction is  also  in  its  favour,  as  it  is  that  of  a  horizontal 
wedge  divided  into  quarters,  three  of  which  are  indicated 


TABLET    FRACTION    SIGNS.  129 

by  a3  many  upright  wedges,  the  middle  wedge  being 
taken  to  be  in  the  centre  of  the  prostrate  one. 

Allied  to  this  character,  both  in  form  and  significance, 
are  two  others.  One  of  these  occurs  repeatedly  in 
Column  III.,  where  in  lines  12-16  (preceded  by  two  con- 
jectures) it  stands  as  the  sign  for  the  3-palm  ell. 

In  the  summary  line  of  Column  II.,  sub-column  1, 
line  33,  is  another  instance  of  the  use  of  a  character 
similar  in  appearance  to  that  under  consideration.  It 
is  here  taken  to  signify  'three,'  that  being  the  unusual 
number  of  reeds  into  which  the  whole  multiplicand  sub- 
column  above  it  had  been  multiplied. 

It  is  not  certain  that  these  three  characters,  so  similar 
in  meaning  to  one  another,  are  exactly  identical  in  shape. 
The  three  upright  wedges  in  each  of  them  may  have  been 
slightly  differentiated  in  position,  so  as  to  give  a  distinctive 
character  to  each.  In  the  case  of  the  five  occurrences  on 
Column  III.,  it  may  have  been  intended  to  convey  that 
the  small  ell  there  was  three-quarters  the  length  of  the 
ordinary  or  medium  ell,  just  as  the  old  English  ell  of 
27  inches  was  three-quarters  of  a  yard.  This  would  then 
be  its  name,  and  no  difference  of  structure  would  be 
required,  the  same  sign  serving  for  three-quarters  of  an 
integer  and  the  three-quarter  ell. 

(4)     (^)  =  J-  (  ?  L.). 

The  original  sign  for  one-fourth  does  not  now,  unhappily, 
occur  in  any  part  of  the  tablet  as  an  independent  character. 
Its  place  in  Column  II.,  sub-column  6,  line  23,  where  the 


X30  THE    TABEENACLE. 

*  system '  of  the  tablet  makes  it   imperative/  has  been 
irremediably  injured  and  the  writing  defaced. 

On  the  principle  of  analogy  and  by  acting  on  the  rule 
already  suggested  as  that  by  which  the  expression  of  all 
the  fractions  was  arrived  at,  we  may  give  to  it  the 
character  of  a  horizontal  wedge  of  which  the  fourth  part 
is  indicated  by  a  wedge  standing  above  it.  Its  place 
should  be  to  the  right  of  the  centre.  While,  however, 
no  instance  of  such  figure  is  to  be  found,  there  are  slight 
indications  that  the  sign  for  one- quarter,  when  used  in 
combination  with  other  fractions,  was  a  single  perpen- 
dicular wedge.     This  will  be  seen  in  the  next  paragraph. 

(5)  m=h 

This  sign  actually  occurs  only  in  Column  TV.,  lines  26 
and  31,  and  conjecturally  in  Column  II.,  line  31.  These 
occasions  enable  us  to  determine  its  value  with  something 
like  certainty,  and  to  analyze  its  form  in  harmony  with 
the  examples  and  principles  already  laid  down.  Its  com- 
position would  seem  to  have  been  determined  by  a  union 
of  two  other  fractions,  thus  : — 

^  =  h 
1  =  1 

These  being   added   together   will   give   the  fraction  of 

five-sixths. 


^  Its  value  is  determined  by  the  single  -wedge  of  one  palm  in  sub -column  1, 
governed  by  the  multiplier  3,  producing  5  of  a  smaU  reed.  No  other  fraction 
could  have  been  used. 


TABLET   FEACTION   SIGNS.  131 

(6)   11?  =  |. 

In  close  conjunction  with  the  sign  for  three-quarters 
will  be  found  that  for  seven-eighths,  which  seems  to  have 
been  founded  upon  it.  Of  the  one-quarter  which  remained 
when  three  had  been  cut  off,  to  make  the  former,  it  was 
but  necessary  to  halve  the  remainder  to  give  the  desired 
result  of  seven-eighths.  This  was  accordingly  done,  but 
the  additional  wedge,  instead  of  being  placed  beside  the 
other,  was  written  above  it,  thus  signifying  that  of  the 
original  whole  number,  but  one-eighth  was  excluded 
instead  of  one-quarter.     It  appears  in  Column  II.,  line  26. 

In  closing  this  part  of  the  subject  I  may  say  that  I  am 
quite  aware  that  to  some  of  the  above-mentioned  characters 
other  meanings  are  given  by  Cuneiform  scholars.  I  do 
not  dispute  the  correctness  of  their  interpretation.  As, 
however,  most  characters  of  this  early  language  have 
more  than  one  meaning,  and  in  some  cases  a  great  variety 
of  meanings,  I  would  urge  that  to  those  already  accepted 
the  values  here  given  to  these  signs  may  be  added.  I  do 
this  upon  the  ground  of  the  homogeneity  of  the  whole 
document  before  us,  which  requires  that  in  it  these  values, 
and  these  only,  be  read  into  the  six  signs  which  have 
already  engaged  our  attention. 


"We  pass  now,  by  a  natural  transition,  to  the  consideration 
of  the  remaining  characters  of  the  tablet,  i.e.  those  other 
than  figures  or  arithmetical  signs.     These  will  merit  the 


132  THE    TABERNACLE. 

most  cautious  and  enliglitened  treatment,  as  it  is  upon, 
their  evidence  that  the  whole  metrological  value  of  the 
tablet  rests.  As  with  ourselves  a  series  of  ledger  accounts 
are  dependent  for  the  just  appreciation  of  their  figures 
upon  the  headings  of  their  columns  for  pounds,  shillings, 
and  pence,  so  here.  The  six  characters  now  to  engage 
our  attention  correspond,  in  their  uses,  with  the  £  s.  d.  of 
commerce ;  and  any  error  of  interpretation,  or  feature  that 
may  be  overlooked,  will  vitiate  the  whole  scheme  and 
render  it  worthless. 

In  order  to  distinguish  these  six  determinatives-of- values 
from  the  *  signs  *  already  dealt  with,  they  are  here  named 
ideographs,  though  this  term  is  not  perhaps  philologically 
correct.  They  are  taken  in  the  order  of  their  supposed 
length- values,  rising  from  the  lesser  to  the  greater. 

(1)    %]  5^y  =  the  Sosstis  (sH-si). 

The  union  of  these  two  characters  is  approved  by 
Mr.  Theo.  Gr.  Pinches,  LL.D.,  who  writes:  'These  two 
characters  cannot,  when  side  by  side,  be  separated,  and 
in  that  case  they  stand  for  hand-horn,  the  gf  meaning 
"  hand  "  and  the  ^|  meaning  *'  horn.*' ' 

Avoiding  all  possible  controversial  matter  as  to  how 
this  combination  came  afterwards  to  be  interpreted  into 
its  recognized  and  cognate  meaning  or  meanings,  I  wish 
to  confine  myself  to  the  sole  evidence  of  the  Senkereh 
tablet,  from  the  first  column  of  which  we  learn  that  the 
fundamental  measure  of  Babylonian  metrology  was  divided 
into  sixty  spaces.     These,  we  may  suppose,  to  have  been 


TABLET    VALUE    SIGI^S.  133 

marked  by  notches  on  a  stick  or  rule,  or  by  cuttings  in 
a  clay  tablet.  It  is  not  improbable  that  these  notches,  or 
rather  the  spaces  between  them,  were  originally  called 
*  horns,'  and  as  the  measure  of  the  hand  was  the  basis  of 
the  system,  there  is  every  reason  for  the  application  of  the 
terra  *  hand-horn '  to  the  length-measure  which  Berosua 
the  Chaldean  tells  us  was  the  original  of  the  Babylonian 
system  of  metrology. 

This  compound  ideograph  gf  ^f  occurs  no  less  than 
ten  times  in  a  perfect  state  on  the  tablet,  at  other  times 
requiring  to  be  read-in  as  part  of  the  sub-columns  in 
which  varying  numbers  of  sossi  are  given.  This  is 
noticeably  the  case  in  the  first  twelve  lines  of  Column  II., 
sub-columns  1  and  6.  A  still  better  example  of  its 
omission,  all  the  existing  figures  being  authentic,  may 
be  found  in  Column  lY.,  sub-column  1,  lines  1-17,  with 
the  denominator  unexpressed.  In  this  case  the  twelve 
y|j[  in  sub-column  3  are  taken  to  belong  to  the  figures 
on  their  right. 

Diagram  Y.  shows  that  no  single  ideograph  has  so 
many  occurrences  on  the  tablet  as  that  for  the  sossus. 
This  is  what  should  have  been  expected  when  its  premier 
position  is  remembered.  It  ought  to  be  no  detriment  to 
this  aspect  of  the  case  that  the  ancient  artist  has  sometimes 
forgotten  to  head  his  sub-columns  with  the  yard  or  foot 
or  inch  of  his  day,  or,  likelier  still,  has  failed  to  find 
room  for  it.  The  coherency  of  the  whole  tablet  should  be 
our  sufficient  warrant  for  understanding  these  governing 
signs  when  not  expressed. 


134  THE    TABERNACLE. 

(2)     ry  =  JL  of  Palm} 

The  measure  next  larger  in  size  to  the  soss  was  a  measure 
of  three  sossi.  It  is  almost  the  only  length-measure  of 
the  tablet  which  is  not  somewhere  represented  by  a  single 
wedge.  Its  only  occurrence  is  in  Column  I.,  sub-column  6, 
lines  7-13. 

The  interpretation  of  this  character  is  based  upon  the 
fact  that  Column  I.  is  throughout  its  length  a  table  of 
equivalents,  every  item  in  sub-column  6  being  the  equation 
of  the  corresponding  item  in  sub-column  1.  This  principle 
of  constructing  Column  I.  carries  with  it  the  meaning  of 
this  ideograph,  both  the  characters  fff  and  TH  appearing 
in  all  their  original  clearness  in  lines  7  and  8. 

The  special  value  and  use  of  a  measure  of  this  length 
will  presentl}^  appear  in  the  fact  that  it  was  the  one- 
sixtieth  part  of  the  small  ell. 

(3)     ff]  =  the  Palm  {gar). 

Proceeding  in  the  same  direction  as  hitherto,  from 
smaller  to  larger,  we  come  to  the  ideograph  for  palm  or 
hand-breadth.  As  this  was  the  '  fundamental  *  from  which 
all  other  measures  were  derived,  either  by  division  or 
multiplication,  its  written  sign  has  more  than  an  ordinary 
interest  for  the  student. 

The  character  itself  appears  in  Columns  I.  and  lY. 

^  The  conveutional  value  of  YH  is  the  fraction  f.  This  is  arriTed  at  by 
assuming  that  the  first  upright  wedge  in  Column  I.,  on  line  14,  has  60 
constituent  parts,  of  which  9,  each  of  the  value  of  6  parts,  are  given  in 
Section  A,  sub-column  3.  The  true  character  for  f  has  already  been  given 
in  (5),  p.  130. 


TABLET    VALUE    SIGNS.  135 

In  the  former  it  is  shown  in  every  Hue  of  Sections  C 
and  J),  having  been  effaced  in  but  one  of  ten  occurrences. 
It  is  here  used  in  conjunction  with  the  various  fractions 
that  constitute  the  hand-breadth,  these  rising  from  half- 
a-palm  to  2^  palms. 

In  Column  TV.  its  use  is  slightly  different.  It  occurs 
on  lines  2-8,  in  order  to  give  the  value  of  the  figures  in 
sub-column  6.  These  are,  in  this  way,  shown  to  be  so 
many  sixtieths  of  the  palm,  and  therefore  sossi.  In 
lines  10-14  it  serves  a  similar  purpose  for  the  figures  in 
sub-column  4. 

Its  non-recital  on  line  9  is  instructive.  That  being  the 
line  on  which  the  60  sossi  or  palm  was  reached  in  the 
progression,  no  characterization  was  necessary,  the  single 
wedge  (representing  the  completed  palm)  appearing  in 
sub-column  6.  Thus  does  the  intentional  omission  of 
a  character  here  tend  to  give  validity  to  its  insertion 
both  above  and  below.  Its  insertion  would  have  been 
misleading. 

(4)     (M  or)     3T  =  S-pabn  EIL 

^y  =  ^-paJm  EIL 

1  ^y  =  6'paim  Ell. 

These  three  characters  are  taken  together  here,  as  they 
not  only  mutually  illustrate  each  other's  construction,  but 
are  found  together  at  the  foot  of  Column  IL,  where  they 
occupy  a  position  of  isolation  on  line  33,  as  indices  of 
the  various  columns,  or  summaries  of  their  contents. 

1  It  is  unnecessary  to  remark  that  the  fish-tail  is  here  the  sign  of  an  extra 


136  THE    TABERNACLE. 

First,  as  to  their  plan  of  construction.  It  will  be  seen 
that  the  upright  wedge  is  common  to  them.  This  stands 
to  the  left  in  each  character,  and  is  the  symbol  of  unity 
or  completeness. 

At  right  angles  to  this  are,  in  one  case  3,  in  another  4, 
and  in  another  5  horizontal  wedges,  these  being  the  number 
of  palms  of  which  the  several  ells  respectively  consisted. 

If  these  index-characters  be  compared  with  those  in 
the  body  of  the  tablet,  a  slight  difference,  not  of  shape, 
but  of  aspect,  will  be  observed  in  one  of  them. 

(a)  The  5-palm  ell  has  a  long  series  of  occurrences  in 
Column  lY.,  where  its  appearance  corresponds  with  that 
at  the  foot  of  Column  II.  Its  use,  however,  is  to 
accompany  the  development  of  the  double  large  ell  from 
its  earliest  fraction  of  a  single  palm  to  its  maximum  of 
nine  palms,  when  it  is  merged  into  the  third  of  a  great 
reed  of  1,800  sossi.  This  illustrative  use  of  an  ideograph 
seems  to  be  a  singular  one  in  the  whole  of  the  document 
we  are  examining. 

(b)  The  4-palm  ell  does  not  appear  as  a  *  character '  in 
any  part  of  the  body  of  the  tablet,  though  it  is  referred  to 
by  a  series  of  single  wedges  in  Column  III.,  sub-column  6, 
lines  17-24.  In  this  connection  a  comparison-study  of 
Sections  B  and  C  should  be  found  useful. 

(c)  The  3  -  palm  ell  has  a  fivefold  appearance  in 
Column  III.,  sub -column  6,  lines  12-16.  It  is  not 
a  matter  of  importance  that  the  wedges  composing  it, 
while  bearing  the  same  relation  to  one  another,  are  placed 
at  a  different  angle.  This  is  not  unusual,  and  does  not 
affect  the  value  of  the  character. 


TABLET    YALUE    SIGNS.  137 

(5)    ^  i^^»—  =  Great  Reed  {kas-hu)} 

Dr.  Pinches'  note  on  these  two  characters  is  as  follows  : 

*  These  two  characters  cannot  when  side  by  side  be 
separated,  and  in  that  case  they  stand  for  a  well-known 
measure  of  length,  *'  the  long  road,"  and,  by  extension, 
for  the  space  of  time  known  as  a  Babylonian  hour  (two 
of  our  hours),  apparently  the  period  needed  to  walk  the 
distance  indicated,  i.e.  about  7  miles.' 

I  give  this  note  as  containing  the  Assyriologists* 
current  view  of  the  interpretation  of  these  associated 
characters.  "While  not  presuming  to  attempt  to  traverse 
these  conclusions,  I  wish  to  place  (beside  them)  the 
conviction  forced  upon  me  by  the  evidence  of  the  Senkereh 
tablet  as  to  what  possibly  was  their  earlier  and  more 
primitive  meaning.  It  is  that  ^  stands  here  for  the 
instrument  by  which  lands  or  roads  were  measured.  We 
learn  from  Ezekiel  (c.  B.C.  600),  who  wrote  in  Babylonia, 
that  the  courts  and  open  spaces  about  the  temple  were 
measured  by  a  reed  of  six  cubits,  each  of  which  was 
a  palm-breadth  longer  than  the  cubits  of  the  measuring 
line  (Ezekiel  xl.  5  and  xlii.  16).  May  it  not  have 
been  that  originally  this  ideograph  stood  for  the  reed  of 
measurement,  and  was  afterwards  transferred  to  the  thing 
measured  ? 

I  take  the  ideograph  ^^>—  to  be  an  adjectival  element 

1  Professor  Sayee,  "vrho  occupies  the  Chair  of  Assyriology  at  Oxford,  writes : 

*  ^^  is  the  primitive  hieroglj^h   ^xXf ,  which  denotes  sina,  or  double. 

I  prefer  my  old  rendering  "douhle-length"  for  kas-hu.^ 
This  is  in  full  accord  with  my  text. 


138  THE    TABERNACLE. 

governing  its  associated  character,  and  representing  that 
the  reed  intended  is  one  of  five-palm  ells,  there  being  five 
wedges  in  its  figure. 

Rawlinson's  transcription  of  the  Senkereh  tablet  gives 
this  ideograph  as  occurring  on  ten  lines  of  Column  IV., 
i.e.  throughout  Section  C,  where  it  is  obviously  in  place. 
But  he  also  gives  it  as  appearing  in  the  ten  corresponding 
lines  of  Column  II.,  where  it  is  as  obviously  out  of  place, 
having  been,  in  all  likelihood,  copied  as  to  its  exact  form 
from  the  clearer  indentation  of  Column  lY. 

The  character  required  in  Column  II.  is  one  of  three 
wedges,  and  in  Column  III.,  where  it  has  now  been 
wholly  effaced,  one  oifour  wedges. 

To  anyone  who  has  examined  the  tablet  at  first  hand, 
these  suggested  modifications  and  additions  will  not  appear 
overbold,  so  bad  in  parts  is  its  present  condition. 

(6)     J^  =  -f  or  Plus  (ammatu). 

This  character  occurs  authentically  twenty-five  times 
on  Rawlinson's  transcription,  and  the  accompanying 
reconstruction  diagrams  show  that  it  has  been  effaced  in 
many  other  places,  in  seven  of  which  Rawlinson  suggests 
it.      It  is  found  only  in  Columns  I.  and  III.  as  authentic. 

Over  the  meaning  of  this  character  earnest  consultations 
have  taken  place  with  one  or  more  eminent  Cuneiform 
scholars,  as  it  is  upon  the  significance  and  value  of  this 
element  that  previous  attempts  to  interpret  and  reconstruct 
the  Senkereh  tablet  have  been  based. 

That  in  much  Cuneiform  writing  'tf^  means  'cubit' 
has  been  clearly  and  fully  proved.     "With  this  knowledge 


TABLET    AEITHMETICAL    SIGN.  139 

philologists  have  approached  the  consideration  of  the 
tablet,  and  as  a  result  have  seen  cubits  in  its  first  column, 
where  we  have  found  palms  only.  The  consequence  has 
been  that  Lenormant  found  acres  and  stadia  within  its 
four  corners,  and  Lepsius  stadia  and  parasangs.  The 
former  gives  its  total  at  21,600  '  lines,''  and  the  latter 
12,960,000  '  lines:  I  find  but  10,800  '  lines;  all  of  which 
are  contained  within  the  space  of  eighteen  English  feet. 

This  divergence  is  caused  by  my  treating  the  document 
primarily  from  a  mathematical  point  of  view,  and  owing 
to  the  fact  that  I  have  no  philological  prepossessions. 
Seeing  the  unity  and  geometric  accuracy  of  its  reverse 
side,  I  am  encouraged  to  find  similar  characteristics  in 
its  obverse.  In  so  doing  I  am  driven  to  the  conclusion 
that  whatever  other  meanings  *!^  had,  then  or  at  other 
times,  on  the  tablet  it  means  j;/i^s,  and  jt)/w5  only.^ 

Thus  understood,  *^^  becomes  the  principal  factor  in 
the  solution  of  the  whole  mystery  of  the  Senkereh  tablet, 
and  enables  it  to  be  read  with  the  consistency  and 
coherency  of  a  proposition  of  Euclid. 

From  considerations  of  space  I  must  refer  my  readers, 
for  the  systematized  results  of  the  whole  re-reading  of 
the  tablet,  to  the  summarized  contents  of  Diagrams  V. 
and  YI.  pp.  116,  117.  Attention  is  also  called  to  the 
hitherto  unmentioned  numerical  summaries  at  the  foot  of 
Columns  II.  and  lY. 


1  Professor  Sayce  allows  that  in  later  Assyrian  '^^  sometimes  has  the 
meaning  of  ic  or  *  and.'  This  concession  is  all  tliat  is  necessary,  as  no 
date  is  claimed  for  the  actual  Avritinff  of  the  Senkereh  tablet. 


140 


CHAPTER    II. 

THE  RESTORATIOl^   OP   THE   SCALE 

OF  GUDEA  AND  ITS  COINCIDENCES 

WITH  THE  SENKEREH  TABLET. 


1. 

TTAYING  gained  from  the  Senkereh  tablet  the  literary 
J-J-  evidence  as  to  the  number  of  ells  used  in  Babylonia, 
together  with  that  of  their  relative  constituent  fractions, 
we  further  require  some  material  evidence  from  the  same 
field,  and  of  about  the  same  age,  in  order  to  produce 
a  working  scheme  which  shall  claim  to  reproduce  the 
length-measures  of  5,000  years  ago.  Evidence  of  this 
nature  fortunately  lies  within  our  reach,  and  in  the 
interior  co-ordination  of  these  two  factors  will  lie  the 
proof  of  the  theory  now  for  the  first  time  laid  before 
the  public  in  its  entirety.  It  will  be  apparent  that  if 
any  one  measure  can  be  substantiated  as  being  common 
to  the  two  documents  before  us,  the  size  of  all  the 
other  measures  can  be  derived  from  it.  Also,  that  the 
most  useful  length  which  could  be  produced  would  be 
that  of  the  *  fundamental  *  palm.  Its  discovery  in 
a  permanently  concrete  form  would  be  in  itself  a  most 
striking  indication  that  the  antique  to  which  it  belonged 


HISTORY  OF   THE   SCALE   OF   GUDEA.     141 

was  of  the  same  intellectual  dispensation  as  the  Senkereh 
tablet,  in  which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  palm  takes  the 
first  place.  These  two  discovered  'palms,'  being  placed 
side  by  side,  should  show  such  fractional  affinities  and 
identic  subdivisions  as  will  enable  the  archaeologist  to 
say  :  *  These  may  belong  to  one  civilization  and  to  the 
same  system  of  Metrology.'  Such  is  the  nature  of  the 
case  now  to  be  laid  before  the  public,  and  it  is  upon 
these  lines  that  the  evidence  will  move.  In  considering 
it  readers  will  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  the  new 
witness  is  a  very  ancient  one,  and  that  Time  has  not 
failed  to  show  its  ravages  here,  as  it  has  done  on  the 
face  of  its  fellow-witness  from  Senkereh. 

In  1881  M.  de  Sarzec  undertook  a  series  of  ex- 
cavations for  the  French  Government^  in  one  of  the  tells 
of  Babylonia,  not  far  from  Senkereh.  This  has  since 
proved  to  be  the  site  of  the  ancient  city  of  Lagash  or 
Lagas,  the  ruins  of  which  are  130  miles  south-east  of 
Babylon.     It  is  now  known  as  the  village  of  Telloh. 

1  *  What  should  a  French  explorer,  Mr.  E.  de  Sarzec,  French  consul  in 
Basra,  bring  home  but  nine  magnificent  statues  made  of  a  dark,  nearly  black 
stone  as  hard  as  granite,  called  diorite.  Unfortunately  they  are  all  headless  ; 
but,  as  though  to  make  up  for  this  mutilation,  one  head  was  found  separate, — 
a  shaved  and  turbanned  head  beautifully  preserved  and  of  remarkable  work- 
manship, the  very  pattern  of  the  turban  being  plain  enough  to  be  reproduced 

by  any  modem  loom The  title  of  patesi  (not  king)  adopted  by 

Gudea  points  to  great  antiquity,  and  he  is  generally  understood  to  have  lived 
somewhere  between  4000  and  3000  B.C.  That  he  was  not  a  Semite  but  an 
Accadian  prince  is  to  be  concluded  from  the  language  of  the  inscriptions  and 
the  writing,  which  is  of  the  most  archaic  character.' — Eagozin's  Chaldean 
3rd  edition,  pp.  92,  214. 


142 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


SCALE    OF    GUDEA. 


143 


m 


S   XT' 

gl 


^ 


CO 


OS* 


■■■\ 


Q2    Z 


«S 


.^ 

h^ 


^vx 


M 


5: 

1 

a 

H 

^ 

a^ 

^1> 

s4^ 

§ , 

St 

t^ 

"^  ^ 

^ 

§.-v^ 

s 

Z'^ 

■«  E 

^^ 

^J 

s. 

.!■§ 

1^ 

$3 

3 
■X 


^ 


•5 


144  THE    TABERNACLE. 

Burled  in  the  courtyard  of  an  archaic  palace  at  Telloh, 
M.  de  Sarzec  found  eight  headless  statues  of  diorite.  These 
are  now  in  the  Louvre  Museum,  a  cast  of  one  having 
been  presented  to  the  Trustees  of  the  British  Museum 
(No.  91,025).     Its  notice-card  bears  the  date  of  b.c.  2500. 

This  piece  of  engraved  statuary  represents  King  Gudea 
as  a  worshipper,  in  the  act  of  dedicating  his  palace  to  the 
care  of  some  deity.  His  hands  are  folded  in  the  attitude 
of  prayer,  and  on  his  knees  lies  a  slab  of  stone.  On  this 
slab  there  is  engraved  the  ground-plan  of  a  building 
which  was  evidently  of  earlier  erection  than  that  of  the 
palace,  the  walls  and  courtyard  of  which  still  exist.  Both 
these  palaces  stood  upon  the  same  site,  and  have  a  general 
likeness  of  plan  to  one  another.  On  the  slab,  besides  the 
ground-plan,  are  engraved  two  other  details.  One  of 
these  is  a  graving  tool,  which  has  no  message  for  us,  apart 
from  the  fact  that  it  is  similar  in  every  respect  to  tools  in 
use  to-day. 

The  other  is  a  record  of  the  measure,  or  one  of  the 
measures,  by  which  the  palace  was  built.  It  is  this 
feature  of  the  slab  which  is  now  to  claim  our  attention. 
The  rule — known  as  the  rule  of  Gudea — is  in  the  form  of 
a  double  line  cut  near  the  outer  edge  of  the  slab.  In  it 
are  a  number  of  indentations  or  cuts,  which  give  to  the 
rule  its  unique  value  and  importance.  It  is  to  the  great 
loss  of  ourselves  that  parts  of  this  rule  are  missing,  the 
two  corners  of  the  slab,  i.e.  those  farthest  away  from  the 
king's  body,  having  been  broken  off  and  lost. 

Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  restore,  by  conjecture, 
these  broken-off  portions,  and  thus  to  complete  the  rule, 


LENGTH  OF  THE  SCALE.      145 

but  none  of  these  has  met  with  general  acceptance.  The 
first  was  made  by  the  discoverer,  who  gives  to  the  slab 
a  total  length  of  29  centimetres,  and  to  the  graduated 
scale,  as  restored  by  him,  a  length  of  27  centimetres  ^ 
=  10-6301133  British  inches.  Professor  Hommel  gives 
to  the  rule  an  original  length  of  249  millimetres,^  or 
9-80332671  inches.  Professor  Paul  Haupt  says,  '  The 
graduated  portion  of  the  rule  of  Gudea,  on  statue  B, 
is  10 J  inches,  while  the  entire  length  of  the  rule  is 
lOf  inches.'  ^ 

These  varying  lengths  would  seem  to  have  been  arrived 
at  by  reading  the  cuttings  of  the  rule  from  the  left-hand 
side  of  the  figure.  Also,  I  have  not  seen  it  remarked  that 
the  slab  itself  is  not  rectangular. 

An  original  measure  of  the  slab  at  the  edge  nearest 
to  the  king's  body  gives  11|  inches  as  the  length.  If  the 
existing  lines  on  either  side  be  produced,  they  will  show 
a  contraction  of  two-fifths  of  an  inch  in  the  length  of  the 
slab.  It  is  at  this  point  that  the  first,  or  inner,  line  of  the 
rule  is  met. 

The  rule  itself  is  to  be  credited  with  corners  which  were 
right  angles.  We  thus  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  the 
rule  was  lOi  inches  in  length.  This  is  the  measure  which 
Dr.  Oppert  gives  as  the  result  of  the  measurement  of  the 
walls  of  Khorsabad.  His  words  are,  '  The  Assyrian  span 
is  therefore  exactly  104  inches.'  See  Records  of  the  Fast, 
new  series,  vol.  xi,  for  1878,  pp.  22-23. 

1  Decouvertes  in  Chaldee,  by  E.  de  Sarzec,  1884-1889,  plate  15. 

2  Article  Babylonia,  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  Bible,  vol.  i.  p.  218. 

3  Ezekiel  vol.  of  the  Polychrome  Bible,  p.  180,  note.  The  rule  of  Gudea 
on  statue  E  is  here  said  to  be  a  line  measure  and  not  an  end  measure. 


146  THE    TABERNACLE. 

2. 

Having,  with  Oppert's  support,  arrived  at  tlie  first 
result  in  the  length  of  10 '8  inches,  we  have  further  to  see 
what  were  the  interior  divisions  of  this  space,  as  denoted 
by  the  cuttings  which  still  remain  on  it,  many  others 
having  doubtless  been  effaced. 

It  is  at  this  point  that  I  part  company  with  my  pre- 
decessors in  the  attempt  to  solve  these  difficulties.  The 
length  I  give  to  the  rule  differs  but  slightly  from  that 
of  the  French  savant  who  first  gave  attention  to  it.  But 
in  the  matter  of  its  interior  economy  /  begin  at  the  other 
end.  The  data  of  De  Sarzec  and  Hommel  are  shown  at 
b  and  c  on  the  accompanying  drawing.  Mine  may  be  seen 
at  a,  where,  as  at  b,  are  opposite  cuts  in  the  rule  (p.  143,  B). 

It  is  these  opposite  cuts  that,  by  the  plan  herein  adopted 
for  determining  the  original  length  of  the  rule,  mark  its 
'  third,'  there  being  to  their  left  twice  the  distance  that 
there  is  to  their  right.  If,  however,  the  same  distance 
of  3  6  inches  be  measured  from  the  other  end  of  the  rule, 
it  will  be  seen  that  there  are  no  double  cuts  at  the  120th 
soss,  thus  showing  that  the  rule  did  not  consist  of  three 
equal  spaces,  but  of  two  divisions,  of  which  one  was 
double  the  length  of  the  other.  This  fact  will  have  an 
important  bearing  upon  its  analysis  and  reconstruction, 
now  to  be  entered  upon. 

(a)  The  smallest  measure  of  the  Senkereh  tablet  is 
the  *  line/  three  of  which  went  to  each  soss.  The  same 
relation  is  given  in  the  Gudea  Scale,  though  the  process 
of    development    naturally    differs.      In    this    case    the 


CUTTINGS    ON    THE    SC2ILE.  147 

exposition  begins  on  the  front  edge  of  the  rule,  and  at 
its  right  side. 

Here  we  find  the  remains  of  seven  cuts,  which  once 
stood  opposite  the  same  number  on  the  inner  side,  these 
latter  still  existing.     In  each  case  these  seven  cuts  on 
either  side  enclosed  six  spaces,  each  of  the  width  of  two 
sossi.     The  six  spaces  on  the  inner  side  were  (as  now) 
clear  and  distinct.     Those  on  the  outer  side,  now  partly 
defaced,  were  the  scene  of  the  demonstration.     This  was 
efiected  by  leaving   every  other   space   vacant,    and  by 
dividing  the   three   intermediate  spaces   into   2,  3,  and 
6^   divisions.      These  were   the   consecutive  fractions  of 
2 — soss  spaces — showing  the  widths  of  1  soss  and  -§•  and 
■i-  soss.     Few  traces  of  these  minute  subdivisions,  though 
engraven   in   the  rock,  could   be  expected   to  withstand 
the  disintegrations  of  millenniums  of  years.     But  enough 
remains   to    show  how  the  system  was   developed  —  the 
'system'  being   that  familiar  to  us   in  the  columns   of 
the  Senkereh  tablet,  as  we  shall  see. 


It  has  already  been  shown  that  the  first  column  of  the 
Senkereh  tablet  is  devoted  to  an  explication  of  the  palm 
in  its  various  fractions  and  larger  relations.  It  has  been 
already  suggested  that  the  '  third '  of  the  Scale  of  Gudea, 
marked  as  division  I,  is  an  embodiment  of  the  same 
fundamental  measure.     There  should  then  be  discoverable 


1  Four  only  are  shown  on  the  dra^ving,  owing  to  their  nearness  to  one 
another. 


148  THE   TABERNACLE. 

in  this  the  same,  or  some  of  the  same,  fractions  as  we  have 
found  in  that.     Nor  is  this  expectation  disappointed. 

{h)  The  first  division  of  the  palm  was  into  digits,  of 
which  three  went  to  its  width. ^  It  is  one  of  the  vexations 
of  the  case  that  the  space  given  to  the  digit  on  the  slab  of 
Gudea  has  been  torn  away  by  one-half  its  length.  It  was 
contained  in  the  right-hand  corner  of  the  rule,  there 
being  nothing  else  with  which  to  fill  up  the  space  between 
the  enclosing  line  and  the  first  cut.  This  space,  *A,'  is 
exactly  that  of  20  sossi,  and  may  justly  be  taken  as 
having  been  meant  to  show  the  length  of  the  digit. 

(c)  Next  to  the  width  of  the  digit  on  the  scale  come 
three  spaces  marked  B,  C,  and  D.  Of  these  0  forms  a 
blank  between  the  other  two — a  device  we  have  already 
seen  used  in  the  case  of  the  *  line.*  B  and  D  are  composed 
of  double-sossi,  the  one  containing  six  and  the  other  ^2^6 
such  parts,  their  values  being  respectively  one-fifth  and 
one-sixth  of  a  palm.  These  two  spaces  of  ten  and  twelve 
sossi  show  that  the  system  of  the  slab,  like  that  of  the 
tablet,  is  both  decimal  and  duodecimal.  This  will  be  seen 
to  be  a  point  of  cardinal  importance,  as  establishing  the 
relationship  of  the  two  witnesses;  the  variation  in  the 
mode  of  exhibition  (one  showing  5's  and  G's,  and  the 
other  lO's  and  12's)  being  an  additional  point  in  their 
favour,  as  being  the  work  of  two  men,  essentially  the  same 
in  system  and  yet  differing  in  the  mode  of  presentation. 


1  On  the  authority  of  Herodotus  (I.  178),  who  says  that  the  difference 
between  the  '  royal '  and  another  Babylonian  cubit  was  three  digits. 


PALM    OF    THE    SCALE.  149 

4. 

Having  shown  some  points  of  harmony  between  the 
*  palm  '  of  the  tablet,  in  its  first  column,  and  that  of  the 
Gudean  scale  in  its  first  division,  it  is  now  advisable  to  see 
if  similar  coincidences  do,  or  do  not,  exhibit  themselves  in 
the  remaining  portions  of  these  two  independent  witnesses. 

In  making  these  investigations,  it  is  of  importance  to 
remember  that  the  Scale  of  Gudea  does  not  consist  of  three 
separate  and  clearly  defined  palm-lengths.  As  there  is 
no  double  cutting  opposite  to  the  120th  soss,  it  is  evident 
that  division  I.  was  of  the  length  of  a  single  palm  and 
division  II.  of  the  length  of  two  palms. 

Looking  at  De  Sarzec*s  reproduction  of  the  cuttings 
found  in  the  maimed  rule  (none  of  which  are  disputed 
in  my  transcript),  it  is  not  difficult  to  see  what  was  its 
plan  of  construction.  In  order  to  do  this,  the  cuttings 
on  its  inner  line  must  now  be  read  from  left  to  right, 
i.e.  from  the  left  of  the  royal  figure. 

These  cuts,  when  not  single,  show  that  with  inter- 
mediate blank  spaces,  as  elsewhere,  there  were  five 
detailed  spaces  given,  containing  respectively  2,  3,  4,  5, 
and  6  interior  divisions.^  The  conjectural  restoration 
of  the  scale,  adhering  to  these  distances  in  detail  0, 
shows  that  their  contents  were  as  follows : — 

*  These  several  distances  being  plainly  marked  on  the  original  rule,  it  •will 
he  found  to  he  not  impossihle  to  subject  them  to  a  personal  scrutiny,  and 
thus  to  arrive  at  the  length  of  the  sossus.  The  evidence  to  be  derived  from 
this  source  is  a  strong  proof  of  the  correctness  of  the  whole,  as  this  t^st  will 
not  stand  had  there  been  either  more  or  fewer  than  180  sossi  in  10-8  inches. 
The  differences  between  these  spaces  is  that  of  a  single  sossus  between  one 
and  another. 


150  THE    TABEENACLE. 

(1)  Subdivision  K,  2  spaces  of  5  sossi  each. 

(2)  „  H,3  „  4  „ 

(3)  „  F,  4  „  3  „ 

(4)  „  D,5  „  2  „ 
),  B,  6  „  2  „ 

The  last  of  these,  B,  has  already  been  dealt  with  on 
a  previous  page,  in  illustration  of  the  sossus  and  the 
*  line.'  This  removes  it  from  the  necessity  of  further 
remark  here,  as,  beyond  the  fact  that  it  is  in  the 
progression  2-6  spaces,  ahove  stated,  it  does  not  belong 
to  the  series  of  exhibits  now  engaging  our  attention. 
Its  contents  of  two  -  soss  spaces  is  in  favour  of  this 
separation,  as  these  spaces  had  already  been  delimited 
in  subdivision  D. 

Taking  the  four  subdivisions  D-K,  together  with  the 
minutiae  of  B  as  previously  explained,  it  will  be  seen  that 
they  cover  the  whole  ground  of  the  units  of  measurement, 
as  well  as  of  their  fractions  of  ^  and  f .  With  this  scale 
before  him,  any  workman  of  ordinary  intelligence  could 
derive  from  it  instruction  as  to  any  of  the  30  lengths 
which  are  contained  within  the  width  of  10  sossi,  equal 
to  "I  of  an  inch.  It  is  probable  that  these  fine  gradations 
of  measurement  were  necessary  for  the  engraving  of 
precious  stones  and  of  seals,  of  which  we  know  that 
large  numbers  were  used  in  Babylonia,  the  British 
Museum  alone  having  a  collection  of  many  hundreds 
from  there. 

A  comparison  of  details  of  the  major  A,  B,  and  C,  on 
the  accompanying  plan,  will  show  that  to  the  left  of  his 


THE    SEXAGESIMAL    SYSTEM.  151 

datum  at  J,  M.  de  Sarzec  could  not  have  found  more  than 
two  or  three  of  the  five  spaces  recorded  in  his  full-length 
rule,  inasmuch  as  the  slab  is  here  broken  away.  I  am, 
however,  inclined  to  think  that  his  suggestion  of  five 
equal  spaces  to  the  left  of  b  is  correct,  and  have  marked 
that  number  in  my  conjectural  restoration.  To  these 
spaces  I  give  a  uniform  width  of  10  sossi,  and  find  them 
separated,  by  subdivision  L,  from  the  sixth  tenth,  which, 
on  the  right,  is  repeatedly  cut  up  into  units,  as  we  have  seen. 
This  separation-device  is  everywhere  apparent  in  the  rule, 
and  was  necessary  to  prevent  overcrowding  and  obscurity. 
That  there  should  be  five  complete  decades  of  sossi, 
and  that  a  sixth  decade  should  be  divided  into  its  elemental 
units,  is  in  harmony  with  the  Babylonian  system  of 
notation.  The  statement  of  Berosus  already  quoted,  that 
the  Babylonians  made  use  of  a  decimal  notation,  is  not 
to  be  understood  in  the  sense  of  their  having  used 
hundreds  and  thousands;  but,  rather,  that  the  sexagesimal 
system  was  commonly  divided  into  6  decades  of  10  each. 
To  this  the  whole  reading  of  the  scheme  of  the  Senkereh 
tablet  bears  witness.  On  its  reverse  face  are  about 
100  examples  in  which  totals  are  worked  out,  the  highest 
result  being  27,000.  All  these  are  given  in  sixties,  or 
in  sixties -of- sixties.  In  another  tablet,  a  portion  of 
which  is  transcribed  on  the  same  plate  as  Rawlinson's 
reading  of  the  Senkereh  tablet,  3,600  is  indicated  by 
a  single  upright  wedge  ^ — being  60  X  60.  So  immutable 
was  the  system  of  sixties  ! 

1  As  is  also  done  in  the  character  immediately  preceding  the  colophon  of 
the  Senkereh  tablet. 


152  THE    TABERNACLE. 

It  is,  therefore  requisite  that  the  systems,  both  of  the 
obverse  of  the  tablet  and  that  of  the  Gudean  scale,  should 
not  transgress  this  cardinal  rule  in  crucial  cases,  either 
by  overstepping  it  in  larger  numbers  or  by  falling  short 
of  it  in  lesser  numbers.  Nor  do  they.  Each  conforms  to 
it,  and  the  fact  that  the  second  division  of  the  Gudean 
scale  exhibits  five  decades  in  full,  and  a  sixth  decade  in 
units,  shows  how  completely  it  fulfils  this  primary 
condition  of  acceptance. 


5. 

Upon  the  general  agreement  of  the  Gudea  Scale  with 
the  Senkereh  tablet  the  whole  case  for  the  Metrology  of 
ancient  Babylonia  here  rests.  If,  however,  we  compare 
the  3-palm  length  of  the  Gudea  Scale  with  the  3-palm 
ell  of  the  tablet,  as  to  their  respective  fractions,  an 
accidental  illegibility  of  the  tablet  in  this  portion  of  its 
obverse  will  deprive  our  conclusions  of  much  of  their 
force.  Two  of  the  original  characters  alone  remain 
(Column  II.,  lines  6-7),  each  of  which  requires  some 
addition  to  its  value  to  fit  it  into  the  system.  The  first 
twelve  lines  of  the  column,  however,  are  a  silent  witness 
to  the  fact  that  they  once  bore  as  many  fractions  of  the 
single  palm,  and  that  these  twelve  relative  constituents 
of  the  palm  were  also  those  of  the  Short  Ell,  the  nexus 
between  the  two  being  the  unexpressed  multiplier  3. 

A  hitherto  little  noticed  peculiarity  of  Column  II.  is 
the  fact  that  it  contained  a  twofold  set  of  measures.  In 
Sections  A  and  B  4  palms  are  worked  out — partly  in 


APPLICATION    OF    TEE    SCALE.         153 

smaller  palm- fractions  and  partly  in  digits — to  a  length 
of  four  small  ells.  The  nine  digits  alone  remain  as 
evidences  of  this  operation — but  they  are  enough.  In 
Section  C,  which  is  in  much  more  perfect  condition, 
a  fresh  set  of  measures  is  evolved.  Here  8  palms  are 
worked  out  into  two  small  reeds — 3  being  throughout  the 
multiplier  of  this  column. 

In  this  unusual  way  two  uniformities  are  maintained. 
One  is  that  the  first  sub-column  in  each  of  Columns  II., 
III.,  and  IV.  shall  consist  of  12  palms.  The  other,  that 
the  total  exhibited  in  the  sixth  sub-column  of  each  of  the 
columns  shall  be  2  reeds.  It  follows  that  the  reeds  of 
Column  II.  consisted  of  4  ells,  and  those  of  Columns  III. 
and  IV.  of  6  ells  each.  So  radical  a  dislocation  of  the 
system  could  only  have  been  caused  by  some  sufficient 
reason,  and  have  been  redeemed  by  some  well-known 
application  of  these  earlier  measures.  My  own  suggestion 
is  that  A  and  B  were  goldsmith's  or  jeweller's  measures, 
a  suggestion  which  is  supported  by  evidence  that  lies 
outside  the  scope  of  this  chapter. 

This  supposed  exceptional  use  of  the  short  ell  is  limited 
to  the  upper  portion  of  the  column.  The  third  section, 
C,  takes  its  place  as  giving  the  fractions  of  the  double 
small  reed,  which  may  have  had  another  use.  It  will  be 
remembered  that  a  reference  has  already  been  given  to 
the  fact  that  the  walls  of  Khorsabad  were  measured 
in  *  spans,'  the  length  of  each  being  that  of  a  small  ell 
(=10-8  inches). 

Though  T%  of  a  foot  happens  to  be  the  actual  length 
of  the  Gudean  scale,  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  limit  its 


154 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


use  to  this  lengtli.  Its  design,  as  composed  of  a  single 
and  a  double  palm-length — each  clearly  separated  from 
the  other,— would  enable  any  workman  to  derive  from  it 
the  length  of  an  ell  of  4  palms  {=  ri  foot)  and  one  of 
5  palms  (=  xf  foot).  It  was  not  necessary  to  elaborate 
these  in  the  small  space  at  the  disposal  of  the  sculptor, 
nor  was  it  possible. 

The  *palm'  being  fundamental  in  both  records  before 
us,  the  following  Table  will  show  its  fractions  as  drawn 
from  the  rule  of  Gudea. 


Eelation 

Value  in 

No. 

to  Palm. 

inches. 

(1) 

1  line 

=  i 

of  sossus 

Tso" 

tV 

(2) 

2  lines 

=  i 

>i 

A 

A 

(3) 

3  lines 

=    1 

sossus 

A 

A 

(4) 

2 

sossi 

7V 

tV 

(5) 

3 

)> 

^v 

A 

(6) 

4 

)f 

■iV 

ki 

(7) 

5 

)) 

t\ 

U 

(8) 

6 

>) 

To 

U 

(9) 

10 

i> 

i 

U 

(10) 

12 

>) 

i 

U 

(11) 

20 

}) 

i 

H 

(12) 

60 

)> 

1 

H 

All  these  fractions,  together  with  many  others  of  larger 
measures,  occur  on  the  obverse  face  of  the  Senkereh  tablet. 
It  is  in  this  coincidence,  so  often  repeated,  that  we  find 
the  correspondence  of  the  Gudean  scale  and  the  Senkereh 
tablet  with  the  early  metric  system  of  Western  Asia, 
which  hitherto  has  been  unknown. 


BABYLONIAN    LENGTH-MEASURES.      155 

This  conclusion  may  prove  to  be  a  key  which  will  fit  the 
wards  of  many  locks,  and  may  give  entrance  to  new  fields 
of  investigation,  for  ''  science  is  measurement." 

Taking  the  human  hand  as  having  an  average,  and 
agreed-upon,  width  of  one- tenth  of  a  yard  or  three-tenths 
of  an  English  foot,  we  have  in  the  sixth  diagram  of  the 
series  (p.  117)  a  complete  metrological  system  which  begins 
at  one-fiftieth  of  an  inch  and  admits  of  indefinite  extension 
and  application.  As  the  experiment  of  inductive  metrology 
has  hitherto  failed  to  lead  to  one  definite  standard  of 
measurement  for  Accadian  and  Semitic  antiquity,  the 
subject  of  comparative  metrology  may  possibly  find  in  this 
study  a  solution  of  some  hitherto  unexplained  variations. 


STJMMAEY    OF    BABYL0:N'IAIT    LEIs^GTH-MEASUEES. 

I.  As  derived  from  the  Senkereh  Tablet  and  the  Gudean  Scale. 
(For  fractions  of  the  palm,  see  ante.) 


ft.     ins. 

Palm         

3-6 

Small  EU,  or  Span         

10-8 

Medium  EU         

14-4 

Large  Ell            

180 

SmaU  Eeed  (4  Small  Ells)         

3     7-2 

Medium  Eeed  (6  Medium  Ells) 

7     2-4 

Large  Eeed  (6  Large  Ells)        

9     0 

Double  SmaU  Eeed        

7     24 

Double  Medium  Eeed 

..       14     4-8 

Double  Large  Eeed        

..       18     0 

156 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


II.  As  derived  from  the  Khorsahad  Tablet} 


yds.    ft.    ins. 

Span,  or  Small  EU             

10-8 

Half -fathom  (=  6  Spans) 

5     4-8 

Fathom  (=  12  Spans)         

10     9-6 

Stade  (=  60  Fathoms)       

...       216     0     0 

Ker  (=  10  Stades) 

...     2160     0     0 

1  The  translated  inscription  of  this  tablet  is  given  on  pp.  221,  222. 


w 


PAET    III. 

THE  TRIPLE  CUBIT  OF  BABYLONIA 

AS  USED  IX  THE 

CONSTRUCTION  OF  THE  TABERNACLE. 


159 


CHAPTEE    I. 

THE   ADJUNCTS  AND  ACCESSORIES 
OF  THE  TABERNACLE. 

A  MOMENT'S  consideration  of  the  subject  will  make 
-^  it  obvious  that  before  the  drawing  of  any  plan  or 
map  from  a  given  specification  it  is  necessary  to  decide 
upon  a  scale  of  measurement  to  which  such  drawing 
shall  conform. 

If  a  single  length-measure  shall  have  been  employed 
in  the  paraphrase  of  any  specification,  it  will  not  greatly 
matter  what  the  adopted  scale  is.  The  final  result  will 
present  the  same  appearance,  whether  to  a  *  foot '  be 
given  a  length  of  ten  or  twelve  or  fourteen  inches.  But 
there  will  always  remain  the  underlying  disadvantage  of 
its  not  being  known  what  was  the  actual  size  of  the 
building  specified.  In  a  plan  so  produced  the  relation 
of  its  parts  one  to  another  may  be  correct,  but  it  will 
be  impossible  to  say  what  relation  in  size  the  whole 
would  have  to  any  existing  building. 

This  is  the  condition  in  which  the  opening  of  the 
twentieth  century  finds  the  question  of  the  sacred 
buildings  of  the  Jews.  All  the  given  measurements 
and  descriptions   of  buildings    in   Scripture   are   stated 


160  THE    TABEENACLE. 

in  '  cubits/  and  tlie  length  of  the  cubit  has  not  been 
determined.  One  well-known  metrologist  gives  it  as 
sixteen  inches ;  another,  equally  well  known,  as  eighteen 
inches  ;  while  a  third,  of  still  higher  reputation,  gives 
his  verdict  in  favour  of  twenty  inches. 

Not  only,  therefore,  is  there  uncertainty  as  to  the 
actual  size  of  the  Tabernacle  and  the  Temples,  but  the 
plans  and  models  of  these  erections  have  been  uniformly 
and  necessarily  inconsistent  within  themselves.  It  has 
been  found  impossible  to  carry  out  the  specifications  as 
they  are  written.  The  difficulties  encountered  in  working 
out  and  harmonizing  the  details  have  been  found  to 
be  insurmountable,  and  various  compromises  have  been 
adopted.  These  have  been  adopted,  not  from  any  want 
of  scholarship  or  of  patient  skill  in  the  treatment,  but 
from  the  fact  that  one  of  the  main  features  of  the  case 
has  hitherto  been  unknown  and  left  out  of  view. 

The  reason  for  these  repeated  failures  will  presently 
appear  in  the  thesis  that  no  single  cubit -length  could 
possibly  succeed  in  reproducing  a  structural  idea,  when 
three  such  lengths  were  employed  in  its  inception  and 
description.  Till  this  fact  has  been  discovered  and  acted 
upon,  all  attempts  at  the  reconstruction,  on  paper  or  in 
models,  of  the  buildings  of  the  Bible  are  of  necessity 
foredoomed  to  error  and  failure. 

It  is  in  this  condition  of  haziness  that  the  absorbing 
topic  of  Jehovah's  House  through  thirteen  centuries  lies ; 
when  a  discovery  has  been  made  which  is  calculated  to 
revolutionize  the  conception  of  both  savant  and  saint, 
of  Jew  and  Christian. 


THE    BIBLICAL    CUBIT    ANNOUNCED.    IGl 

That  discovery  is  that,  about  a  thousand  years  before 
the  birth  of  Abraham,  there  were  in  common  and  every- 
day use  in  Mesopotamia  three  *  ells '  or  cubit-lengths, 
each  of  which  was  applied  in  a  specific  and  separate 
department  of  trade  and  human  interest. 

The  details  and  proofs  of  this  discovery  were  com- 
municated to  the  members  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society 
in  December,  1902,^  and  are  published,  w^ith  corrections, 
as  Part  II  of  this  volume. 

The  conclusions  arrived  at  had  previously  been  an- 
nounced in  the  Quarterly  Statement  of  the  Palestine 
Exploration  Society  for  January,  1902,  in  the  words : 
*  There  were  three  cubits  of  the  respective  lengths  of 
^,  \^,  and  \%  of  an  English  foot,  the  first  of  which  was 
used  exclusively  for  gold  and  gold-tapestry  work,  the 
second  for  building  purposes,  and  the  third  for  measuring 
areas  only/  ^ 

Forged  upon  the  anvil  of  cuneiform  research,  this  key 
will  be  found  to  fit  the  wards  of  every  lock  which  has 


1  Journal  of  the  Eoyal  Asiatic  Society,  April,  1903,  pp.  257-283. 
Art.  YIII. — Hie  Linear  Measures  of  Babylonia  about  u.c.  2500. 

2  Mr.  S.  "Wiseman,  of  the  English  Mission  Hospital  in  Jerusalem,  whose 
life  has  been  spent  in  Palestine,  tells  me,  under  date  29th  February,  1904, 
that  about  fifty  years  ago  there  were  actually  three  different  cubits  or  *  dira  ' 
(arm)  in  ordinary  use  in  Palestine.     They  were — 

(1)  The  diraa  baladi  (=  the  common  Eg)-ptian  cubit),  which  was  used  for 
measuring  linen,  etc.,  manufactured  in  Egj-pt,  and  is  equal  to  22§  inches. 

(2)  The  dirad  Istambouh,  or  cubit  of  Constantinople,  which  was  used  for 
measuring  European  cloth,  etc.,  and  is  about  26^  inches. 

(3)  The  laud  dirad,  used  in  connection  with  land  measurement,  is  equal  to 
30  inches. 

The  difference  between  these  lengths  is  approximately  one  of  3-6  inches. 


162  THE   TABERNACLE. 

hitherto  barred  the  way  to  clearer  light,  and  as  we  proceed 
in  these  studies  it  will  be  found  to  open  the  door  of 
almost  every  architectural  Bible  difficulty,  from  the  days 
of  Moses  to  those  of  Josephus. 

2.  The  suggestion  has  already  been  made  public  that 
when  Abraham  left  the  land  of  Mesopotamia  he  may  have 
taken  with  him  the  standard  length-measures  of  his 
country. 

This  suggestion  assumes  an  air  of  strong  probability 
when  we  find,  as  we  shall  do,  that  on  leaving  Egypt, 
and  without  any  reference  to  the  land  of  their  fathers, 
the  Hebrews  in  the  wilderness  used  the  Babylonian 
measures  for  the  erection  of  the  Tabernacle. 

The  *  pattern '  was  showed  to  Moses  in  the  Mount,  and 
the  record  of  that  revelation,  as  contained  in  the  book 
of  Exodus,  makes  no  reference  to  a  diversity  in  the  length 
of  the  cubit.  These  differences  in  the  meaning  of  the 
word  *  cubit '  were  treated  as  matters  of  common  and 
every-day  knowledge.  It  is  as  if  in  our  own  day  public 
tenders  were  called  for  certain  artistic  metal- work,  in 
which  so  many  ounces  of  gold  and  silver  and  so  many 
ounces  of  brass  and  lead  were  to  be  used.  Neither  of 
the  parties  to  such  a  transaction  would  require  to  be  told, 
or  be  expected  to  record,  that  the  *  ounce '  of  the  former 
was  to  be  one  of  480  grains  and  the  *  ounce '  of  the  latter 
of  437^  grains.  Such  a  distinction  would  be  a  matter 
of  ordinary  knowledge  to  each  party,  and  the  fact  itself 
would,  by  common  custom,  be  placed  beyond  the  possibiKty 
of  dispute. 


'CUBITS'    OF    THEEE    LENGTHS.       163 

This  hypothetical  illustration  may  enable  us  to  under- 
stand how,  in  the  instructions  given  to  Moses  for  the 
creation  of  a  new  Tabernacle,  there  was  no  reference 
made  to  the  various  lengths  of  the  cubit.  None  such 
was  given  as  to  the  length  of  the  single  cubit,  sup- 
posing but  one  to  have  been  used;  and  none  such  was 
given  as  to  the  length  of  any  other  cubit,  or  cubits, 
that  may  have  been  requisite  to  the  carrying  out  of 
the  work. 

The  books  of  the  Bible  are  each  of  them  severely 
compressed,  and  facts  obvious  to  us,  or  to  those  to  whom 
they  were  at  the  first  given,  are  seldom  stated.  We 
thus  have  an  experimental  right  to  assume  that  the 
early  metric  system  of  Western  Asia,  hitherto  unknown 
to  us,  was  perfectly  familiar  to  Moses  and  in  common 
use  amongst  the  early  Hebrew  people. 

These  measures,  from  their  use  in  the  construction  of 
the  Tabernacle,  soon  assumed  a  sacred  character,  and, 
as  we  proceed  adown  the  stream  of  time,  and  pause 
from  time  to  time  to  survey  the  erection  of  this  Temple 
or  of  that,  we  shall  find  that  they  remained  unchanged 
during  the  thirteen  centuries  of  Hebrew  national  life. 

3.  Having  laid  tbe  foundation  of  our  subject  in 
a  far-ofi"  antiquity,  the  evidence  on  its  behalf  going 
back  to  a  period  of  from  twenty-five  to  thirty  centuries 
before  Christ,  we  may  now  proceed  to  build  upon  it 
those  divinely-ordered  erections  around  which  the  heart 
of  Judaism,  Moslemism,  and  Christianity  have  entwined 
the  most  tender  and  sacred  associations. 


164  THE   TABEENACLE. 

Of  these  erections,  the  first  in  order  of  time  is  the 
Tabernacle  in  the  wilderness,  the  date  of  which  is, 
approximately,  1280  b.c.^ 

In  the  endeavour  to  architecturally  restore  the  details 
of  this  earliest  of  all  the  Houses  of  God,  we  shall  be 
faithful  to  all  the  conditions  laid  upon  us  by  the 
testimony  of  the  Senkereh  Tablet  and  the  Gudean 
Scale  —  witnesses  themselves  dating  from  a  period  as 
long  antecedent  to  the  Tabernacle  as  that  was  to  the 
Christian  Era.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  in  the 
infancy  of  histor}^  and  in  the  morning-lands  of  the 
Bible  men  were  careless  or  inexact  in  what  concerned 
their  religious  faith.  All  the  evidence  of  the  inscriptions 
goes  to  show  that  the  religious  faculty  of  the  men  then 
living  played  a  more  important  part  in  the  business  of 
life  than  it  does  amongst  ourselves.  Least  of  all  can 
this  be  supposed  of  the  stock  of  Abraham.  Their 
conservatism  of  what  had  already  been  was  intense. 
A  minute  and  particular  ritual  governed  the  lives  of 
the  best  men  of  the  nation.  The  House  of  Jehovah, 
whether  Tabernacle  or  Temple,  was  the  centre  of  the 
nation's  thought  and  feeling,  and  any  development  or 
reconstruction  there  was  a  matter  of  the  most  reverent 
and  punctilious  consideration.  Believing  the  pattern 
showed  to  Moses  in  the  Mount,  and  the  description 
handed  by  David  to  Solomon,  to  have  been  God-given 


^  Matters  of  chi-onology  and  of  the  date  of  the  composition  of  portions  of 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  lie  beyond  the  range  of  these  pages,  though 
the  very  practical  natui'e  of  these  material  reconstructions  has  an  important 
bearing  on  the  historical  character  of  the  whole  narratiYe,    Eut  see  p.  101. 


HEBEEW    CONSEEYATISM.  1G5 

and  revealed,  the  priests  did  not  dare  to  alter  or  amend 
either  of  them  in  anj^  particular  in  which  escape  was 
possible.  It  is  in  the  force  of  this  sentiment  of  tradition 
that  we  now  find  our  strongest  ally  in  the  endeavour 
to  trace  the  evolution  of  the  Herodian  Temple  from  its 
prototype  of  the  Tabernacle. 


SCALE 

USED    IN    THE    ACCOMPANYIXG   DRAWING   OF 
THE    TABERNACLE 

{With  details). 

1.  Cubit  used  in  the  plotting  of  the  Tabernacle  Court,  1  ft.  6  ins. 

2.  Cubit  used  in  the  erection  of  the  Tabernacle  and  Tent, 

Ufeet. 

3.  Cubit  used  in  the  making  of  the  gold-embroidered  Yeil  and 

the  ten  Curtains,  10*8  inches. 


SIZE    OF    THE    TABERNACLE    COURT.   167 

1.    The  Court  of  the  Tabernacle. 

The  books  attributed  to  Moses  uniformly  speak,  in  the 
singular  number,  of  *the  court'  in  which  the  Tabernacle 
stood.  This  form  of  phraseology  is,  of  course,  perfectly 
correct,  as  the  idea  of  the  unity  and  equal  sanctity  of  the 
whole  enclosed  area  was  thus  kept  prominently  before 
the  mind.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  enclosure 
followed  the  precedent  of  Egyptian  temples,  in  which 
there  were  two  square  areas,  the  temple  itself  being 
situated  in  the  rearmost  of  the  two. 

In  the  delimitation  of  the  Tabernacle  courts  or  squares, 
they  were  placed  as  lying  to  the  east  and  west  of  one 
another ;  and  each  of  the  areas  measured  fifty  cubits  on 
each  of  its  four  sides.  It  is  apparent  that  a  cubit  of 
18  inches,  as  the  measure  of  distance,  applied  to  the  text 
of  Exodus  xxvii.  9-18,  will  give  us  an  enclosed  space  of 
75  feet  in  width,  by  150  feet  in  length. 

In  this  postulate  we  have  the  first  positive  result  of  the 
recovery  of  the  surveyor's  cubit.  Here  is  a  conclusion 
which  brings  into  view,  from  the  uncertainties  of 
speculation,  the  first  concrete  result  of  a  well-ascertained 
fact  of  metrological  lore.  The  importance  of  this 
deliverance  from  the  *  might-have-been '  will  grow  upon 
us  as  we  proceed,  and  it  will  culminate  in  the  demonstration 
of  its  correctness  when  we  come  to  deal  with  the  area 
upon  which  stood  the  Temple  of  Herod.  Till  then  I  must 
ask  my  readers  to  hold  their  final  judgment  in  suspense, 
and  to  allow  the  evidence  on  its  behalf  to  gather  as 
we  go  on. 


168  THE   TABEENACLE. 

NoiCy  we  may  regard  this  application  of  a  Babylonian 
length-measure  to  a  problem  of  Hebrew  architecture  as 
being  on  its  trial.  Then  it  will  be  seen  that  it  was  not 
empirical.  To  this  Q.E.D.  a  study  of  the  whole  series 
of  these  maps  and  plans  ^  is  the  necessary  preliminary. 

A  uniform  width  of  fifty  large  cubits,  with  a  common 
length  of  one  hundred  such  cubits  given  to  the  court  of 
the  Tabernacle,  is  easy  to  remember  as  so  many  half- 
yards.  A  square  of  25  yards  was  thus  the  size  of  each  of 
the  two  rectangles  in  which,  for  nearly  three  centuries, 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  was  solemnized. 

Are  any  traces  of  such  an  area  still  to  be  found? 
There  is  still  visible  at  Seililn,  the  ancient  Shiloh,  a  level 
platform,  which,  in  places,  has  been  cut  into  the  rock  to 
the  depth  of  5  feet.  The  width  of  this  platform,  lying 
on  the  gentle  rise  which  leads  to  the  village,  is  77  feet,  as 
compared  with  the  75  feet  required  by  the  scale.  This 
coincidence  is  remarkable  in  itself,  and  it  is  not  weakened 
by  the  fact  that  the  platform  itself  is  412  feet  in  length, 
as  against  the  requirement  of  150  feet.  For  the  added 
length  of  about  250  feet  I  must  refer  my  readers  to  the 
section  of  this  chapter  on  the  East  Gate  (pp.  175-8),  in  which 
it  will  be  seen  that  such  an  additional  space  was  required. 

Jeremiah  sent  the  men  of  his  day  to  Shiloh  to  see  what 
God  did  to  it  for  the  wickedness  of  Israel  (vii.  12).  To 
the  same  desolate  spot  we  may  appeal  for  a  portion  of  the 

^  The  author  has  in  preparation  volumes  similar  to  this,  dealiog  with 
(a)  Solomon's  Temple ;  (b)  Ezekiel's  Temple ;  (c)  Herod's  Temple ;  in  all 
of  which  the  same  set  of  measures  will  be  used,  with  the  same  local 
applications. 


TABERNACLE    COURT    ENCLOSURE.     169 

evidence  as  to  the  size  of  the  Tabernacle  and  its  courts. 
Such  evidence  will  be  still  more  complete  when  we  know 
the  bearings  of  the  platform  longitudinally.  It  should 
lie,  as  nearly  as  the  science  of  that  day  allowed,  in  the 
direction  of  east  to  west.^  Some  future  traveller  will,  it 
is  hoped,  enlighten  us  as  to  this  point,  and  also  as  to 
whether  the  slope  of  the  ground  on  the  upper  side  affords 
any  indication  of  an  approach  to  the  North  Gate. 

2.    The  Enclosure  and  Hangings  of  the  Tabernacle 

Court. 

Having  levelled  a  space  of  ground  150  feet  long  by 
75  feet  wide,  the  next  care  of  the  Jewish  priests  would  be 
to  enclose  it,  in  accordance  with  the  directions  given  to 
Moses.  These  may  be  seen  in  the  Book  of  Exodus,  where 
we  have  in  chapters  xxvi.  and  xxvii.  the  incipient  account 
or  specification,  and  in  chapters  xxxvi.  to  xl.  the  history 
of  the  erection.  No  further  reference  will  be  made  to 
these  chapters  in  these  pages,  every  reader  having  them 
at  hand,  and  being  supposed  to  be,  or  to  become,  familiar 
with  a  subject  contained  in  so  narrow  a  literary  space. 
No  liberties  will  be  taken  with  the  text  in  this  little  book. 

Anj'-one  who  will  take  a  sheet  of  paper  and  pencil 
and  will  sketch  out  the  places  of  the  sixty  pillars  on 
which  the  curtaining  was  hung^ — twenty  on  each  north 
and  south  side,  and  ten  on  each  west  and  east — will  find 

^  See  Introduction,  p.  xiii. 

2  In  doing  this,  the  direction  of  Exodus  xxvii.  14-15  should  be  borne  in 
mind,  that  there  were  three  lengths  of  curtaining  on  either  side  of  the 
East  Gate  opening.  These  would  require  the  support  of  four  pillars  on  each 
side,  the  corner  pillars  being  counted  to  the  sides. 


170  THE    TABERNACLE. 

himself  confronted  with  this  difficulty,  that  twenty  pillars 
on  each  of  its  larger  sides  will  give  but  nineteen  spaces 
instead  of  the  twenty  requisite,  the  pillars  being  placed 
at  distances  of  five  large  cubits  apart,  reckoning  from 
centre  to  centre.  Not  only  mlist  the  cubits  here  used 
have  corresponded  in  size  with  those  of  the  area,  but 
there  must  have  been  some  special  arrangement  made 
by  which,  while  the  spirit  of  the  instruction  was  obeyed, 
the  letter  of  its  numbers  should  not  be  broken. 

The  solution  of  this  difficulty  may  be  seen  in  the 
detail  drawing,  opposite,  of  the  Tabernacle  court,  where 
the  pillars  are  numbered  to  facilitate  reference. 

Several  results  follow  from  the  adopted  method  by 
which  this  drawing  is  brought  into  harmony  with  the 
text.  Each  of  these  is  thought  to  be  of  sufficient 
importance  to  merit  separate  mention,  inasmuch  as  we 
are  dealing  with  a  portable  erection,  the  details  of 
which  had  a  dominating  effect  upon  subsequent  structures, 
which  were  not  portable,  though  evolved  from  this,  and 
designed  to  serve  the  same  specific  purpose. 

Any  feature  of  the  Tabernacle,  however  seemingly 
unimportant,  may  have  been  developed  and  enlarged  in 
subsequent  Temples,  and,  unless  we  can  trace  its  germ 
in  the  Tabernacle,  will  remain  unaccounted  for,  and  its 
significance  be  undiscovered.     It  is  for  this  reason  that 

o 

the  reader's  thoughtful  attention  is  asked  to  the  two  or 
three  sections  that  follow. 

The  North  Gate. 
An  examination  of  the  adjoining  plan  will  show  that, 


s     ci 


0  Of 


I 

i 

i4 

i 
S3o 


6eo    «: 


9  '0 


0  N    n 


o-o    o— o    o— o   o-o 


D 


C^-S-^ 


— u   o— o"Ti— o    o— o    o— o   6  h      'SI' 


0 L 


no- 


65 

6s 


0  N    S" 


OS 


95    ^- 


6.q 


Outline  Plan  of  the  Outer  Court  and  Tabernacle. 


172  THE    TABERNACLE. 

as  there  arranged,  the  sixty  pillars  around  the  court  left 
a  yacancy  of  one  in  the  circuit.  This  is  not  directly 
referred  to  in  the  text  of  Exodus.  The  mathematics  of 
the  case,  specially  the  placing  of  the  pillars  of  the 
East  Gate  outside  the  alignment  of  the  court,  demand  that 
at  one  point  in  the  perimeter  there  should  be  a  hiatus  of 
15  feet  in  the  curtaining,  caused  by  the  inability  to 
use  a  sixty-first  pillar.  The  place  of  this  hiatus  has 
been  given  as  between  the  tenth  and  eleventh  pillars  on 
the  north  side  of  the  altar,  in  obedience  to  the  direction 
of  Leviticus  i.  11,  that  sacrifices  were  to  be  slain  'on 
the  side  of  the  altar  northward/  ^ 

This  was,  therefore,  the  side  which  would  be  most 
convenient  for  the  admission  of  animals  to  the  court 
itself.  The  worshippers,  other  than  sacrificers,  entered 
the  court  at  the  east  gate.  Those  who  brought  living 
animals  entered,  with  them,  through  the  north  gate, 
and  each  sacrificer  standing  beside  his  offering,  there 
slew  it  before  the  Lord,  and  then  took  his  place  beside 
the  altar  amid  the  other  worshippers.  That  this  remained 
the  highest  act  of  temple  worship  till  the  days  of  Christ, 
we  know  from  His  words  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 


^  This  definition  of  place  would  seem  to  have  heen  thus  vague  ivith 
intention,  as  it  permitted  of  the  sacrifices  being  offered  either  within  or 
without  the  enclosure  of  the  Tabernacle.  In  the  vision  of  Ezekiel's  Temple 
the  larger  sacrifices  were  to  be  killed  without  the  wall,  and  the  smaller,  as 
lambs  and  goats,  within  the  gate  (Ezekiel  xl.  39,  40).  This  was  in  harmony 
with  the  law  of  Leviticus  iii.,  which  states  that  offerings  of  the  herd 
(i.e.  cattle)  were  to  be  killed  at  the  door  of  the  tent  of  meeting  (verse  2),  and 
that  sacrifices  of  the  flock  (i.e.  sheep  and  goats)  were  to  be  killed  before  the 
tent  of  meeting  (verses  8,  13).  That  a  distinction  in  place  was  intended  must 
be  evident  from  the  change  in  the  terminology. 


THE    GATE    OF    SACRIFICE.  173 

(which,  like  all  other  citations,  are  here  taken  from 
the  Revised  Version),  *  If,  therefore,  thou  art  offering 
thy  gift  at  tlie  altar,  and  there  rememberest  that  thy 
brother  hath  aught  against  thee,  leave  there  thy  gift 
before  the  altar,  and  go  thy  way  ;  first  be  reconciled 
to  thy  brother,  and  then  come  and  offer  thy  gift/ 

The  north  gate  of  sacrifice  is  generally  spoken  of  under 
the  name  of  '  the  door  of  the  tent  of  meeting.'  Both  it 
and  its  'screen'  are  referred  to  in  Numbers  iii.  26,  as 
explained  in  chapter  1  of  the  history  of  the  Tabernacle 
(pp.  4,  177).  It  continued  to  bear  this  name  until  after 
the  restoration  from  Babylon,  Zechariah,  the  son  of 
Meshelemiah,  having  been  appointed,  in  David's  time, 
'Northward'  (1  Chron.  xxvi.  14).  In  re-recording  this 
arrangement  the  writer  of  1  Chron.  ix.  21  writes  that 
he  '  was  a  porter  of  the  door  of  the  tent  of  meeting.* 

The  Origin  of  the  Soreg  or  Fence. 

"We  have  not  yet,  however,  learned  all  the  lessons 
which  the  discovery  of  this  north  gate  is  capable  of 
teaching.  Placed  where  it  is,  at  the  junction  of  the 
two  squares  (soon  to  become  separate  courts),  it  afforded 
entrance  not  only  to  the  sacrificing  laymen  of  the  Jewish 
Church,  but  also  to  its  priests.  From  the  beginning  to 
the  end  of  the  sacrificial  dispensation  the  priests  had  their 
own  separate  entrance  into  the  Temple  courts.  The  laity 
being  forbidden  to  set  foot  within  the  inner  square,^  there 

^  The  supplementary  rule  by  which  the  laity  -were  excluded  from  the  inner 
court  of  the  sanctuary  is  given  in  the  words,  'Henceforth  the  children  of 
Israel  shall  not  come  nigh  to  the  tent  of  meeting,  lest  they  bear  sin,  and  die ' 
(Numbers  xviii.  22). 


174  THE    TABERNACLE. 

can  be  little  doubt  but  that  they  were  (when  sacrificing) 
given  admission  to  the  outer  square  by  the  eastern  half 
of  the  entrance- way  on  the  north. 

At  this  point  comes  into  view,  not  clearly,  but  dimly 
through  the  haze  of  far-off  centuries,  the  first  inception 
of  the  Soreg  or  fence,  which  played  so  prominent  a  part 
in  the  history  of  the  later  temples. 

As  the  Levites  were  forbidden  to  enter  the  sanctuary 
building  or  to  touch  the  vessels  of  its  service,  but  might 
enter  the  inner  court  for  service  (Numbers  xviii.  23 ; 
Ezekiel  xliv.  11),  so  those  who  were  neither  priests  nor 
Levites  might  enter  the  outer  or  eastern  court,  but  might 
not  go  farther,  or  come  near  to  the  sanctuary  of  the 
Tabernacle.  Permitted  to  throng  around,  and  even  to 
touch,  the  altar  on  three  of  its  sides,  they  were  strictly 
forbidden  to  pass  the  boundary-line  which  separated  one 
square  or  court  from  the  other.  It,  therefore,  became 
necessary,  from  the  beginning,  to  make  some  upstanding 
line  of  demarcation  between  the  two,  which,  while 
restraining  the  multitude,  should  allow  the  sons  of  Levi 
to  pass  to  and  fro  from  one  court  to  another  accomplishing 
the  duties  of  their  office.  Such  a  line  would  seem  to  have 
been  found  in  a  row  of  young  palm-tree  pillars  planted 
on  the  marchiag  boundary  of  the  two  courts.  Every 
other  one  (i.e.  every  alternate  one)  of  the  spaces  thus 
formed  was  filled  with  palm-branches  interlaced.  The 
evidence  for  this  will  appear  later.  Here  only  it  is  noted 
as  having  formed  the  *  fence '  which  divided  the  two 
courts,  and  had  its  termination  at  one  end  in  the  centre 
of  the  north  gateway. 


THE    GATE    OF    WOESHIP.  175 

This  sacrificial  gate  is  frequently  referred  to  in  the 
Pentateuch,  alwa3^8  under  the  name  of  the  'door  of  the 
tent  of  meeting.*  Early  instances  are,  Exodus  xl.  12  ; 
Leviticus  i.  3;  Numbers  vi.  10.  It  is  to  be  carefully 
distinguished  from  *  The  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  tent 
of  meeting,'  which  is  quite  another  element  of  the  design. 

From  Leviticus  viii.  3,  4,  we  learn  that  at  the  con- 
secration of  Aaron  and  his  sons  all  the  congregation  was 
assembled  without  this  *  door '  or  north  gate.  It  thus 
became  the  place  of  assembly  for  all  Israel  on  great 
ceremonial  or  state  occasions  (Numbers  x.  3 ;  Josb.  six.  51). 
From  the  position  of  the  Shiloh  site  of  the  Tabernacle, 
these  crowds  would  stand  on  gently  rising  ground,  tier 
above  tier.  There  was  thus  no  attempt  made  to  crowd 
*  the  thousands  of  Israel '  into  the  narrow  space  of  the 
outer  court.  When  filled  it  would  not  afford  standing- 
room  for  more  than  5,000  persons. 

The  East  Gate. 

A  point  of  cardinal  importance  to  be  noted  in  the 
reconstruction  of  the  eastern  side  of  the  court  is  that 
there  were  on  that  side  fifteen  cubits  of  *  hangings'  in 
each  of  its  corners.  That  is,  there  were  three  spaces 
of  five  cubits  each,  involving  the  use  of  four  pillars  on 
the  right  and  four  pillars  on  the  left.  These  having  been 
accounted  for  in  the  drawing  as  separate  entities,  there 
remains  the  construction  of  the  gate  itself.  The  hangings 
for  this  were  not  of  fine  twined  linen,  as  were  all  the 
other  curtains  around  the  court,  but  of  embroidered  work 
in  blue,  purple,  and  scarlet,  on  a  foundation  of  white. 


176  THE    TABERNACLE. 

The  hangings  for  the  gate  of  the  court  were  thus  similar 
in  appearance  to  the  '  screen  for  the  door  of  the  tent ' 
opposite  to  them. 

Of  the  fifty  cubits  of  which  the  width  of  the  court 
consisted  throughout,  thirty  were  taken  up  at  its  eastern 
side  by  the  two  lengths  of  corner  curtaining.  Twenty 
remain.  To  these  twenty  cubits  four  pillars  were 
specified,  giving  three  spaces  of  6f  cubits,  or  exactly 
ten  feet  to  each. 

Two  variations  from  the  ordinary  appearance  of  the 
enclosing  curtains  have  now  been  brought  into  view. 
One,  the  embroidered  appearance  of  the  screen-of-the- 
gate  curtains  themselves.  The  other  the  greater  length 
of  each  curtain. 

A  third  appears  in  the  fact  that  we  cannot  imagine  the 
end  pillars  of  the  court  and  the  end  pillars  of  the  gate 
as  being  socketed  side  by  side,  and  touching  one  another. 
Such  bad  form  in  architecture  was  impossible  to  the  best 
art  of  that  day,  leaving  out  of  view  the  claim  of  the 
Tabernacle  and  its  court  to  have  been  constructed  after 
the  *  pattern '  of  the  Mount. 

It  is  true  that  no  relative  position  is  given  in  the 
record  to  the  screen  of  the  east  gate.  We  are  not  told 
that  it  was  to  be  in  the  line  of  the  hangings,  or  that  it 
was  to  be  a  certain  number  of  cubits  eastward  of  that 
line.^  In  this  very  openness  of  the  question  is  to  be 
found  the  proof  of  its  not  having  been  on  the  line. 

^  The  statement  that  the  height  of  the  screen,  in  the  breadth  of  its 
curtains,  was  answerable  to  the  height  in  cubits  of  the  hangings  of  the  court 
(Exodus  xxxviii.  18),  certainly  implies  that  it  was  a  separate  erection,  and  as 
such  may  have  been  a  removable  one. 


YESTIBULE    OF    THE    EAST    GATE.      177 

That  first  authority  on  Eastern  architecture,  the  late 
James  Fergusson,  has  observed  that  the  word  *  gate '  in 
Eastern  languages  has  not  the  meaning  of  passage-way, 
with  enclosing  door  attached,  which  it  has  in  Western 
languages.  When  it  is  stated  (to  take  one  passage  out 
of  many)  that  Mordecai  sat  in  the  King's  gate,  we  are 
to  understand  that  in  the  Persian  palace  there  was  either 
a  separate  hall  or  a  well-defined  space  to  which  the 
name  was  given.  The  word  gate  ( =  shaar)  in  the  Old 
Testament  has  generally,  if  not  universally,  this  meaning, 
separate  words  being  used  for  door  (=  deleth)^  threshold 
[=iscq)h)j  and  opening  {■=^ pethacK), 

It  is  in  this  sense  that  the  description  in  Numbers  iv.  26, 

*  The  screen  for  the  door  of  the  gate  of  the  court,'  is  to  be 
understood.  It  was  a  screen  of  exactly  the  same  width 
as  the  *  door  of  the  gate,'  but  placed  at  some  convenient 
distance  away  from  it,  so  as  to  screen  the  opening  without 
closing  it.^  That  distance  was  left  indeterminate  and 
unexpressed,  for  the  reason  that  it  was  to  be  decided  by 
the  necessities  of  time  and  place.  The  screen  of  the 
gate  was,  in  fact,  a  moveable  item,  so  as  to  meet  the 
growth  of  the  nation's  numbers  in  the  future. 

It  was  at  the  gate  of  the  people,  thus  understood,  that 
the  elders  sat,  on  lawful  days,  for  the  administration  of 
justice.  In  this  space,  and  within  sight  of  the  altar 
fires,  the  strangers  and  the  foreigners  (who  were  in  many 
cases  alien  slaves)   stood  to  worship  the   God   of  Israel 

*  afar  ofi",'  not  being  allowed  to  come  within  the  court  of 

1  Josephus  speaks  of  the  east  gate  as  havkg  a  'yestibule '  {Jntiq.  III.  \-i.  §  2). 


178  THE    TABERNACLE. 

the  Hebrew  people.  We  thus  obtain  from  a  single  word, 
when  understood  in  its  Eastern  sense,  a  flood  of  light 
on  the  early  religious  polity  of  the  Jews,  and  as  we 
proceed  we  shall  find  that,  in  later  ages,  the  most 
unexpected  results  were  evolved  out  of  this  factor  of  the 
Tabernacle  construction. 

"We  may  now,  however,  return  to  the  site  of  the 
Tabernacle  when  at  Shiloh.  It  will  be  remembered  that 
this  was  found  to  be  of  the  right  width,  but  262  feet 
longer  than  was  requisite  for  the  actual  court,  as  it  was 
curtained  off.  In  this  excess  we  have  tbe  requisite  room 
for  the  placing  of  the  three  embroidered  curtains  which 
marked  the  eastern  extremity  of  the  gate.  Standing 
upon  this  spot,  we  may  recall  the  judicial  scenes  of 
Joshua's  later  life. 

Here  Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron,  judged,  and  here, 
centuries  later,  Eli  sat,  and  here  died.  With  him  died 
also  the  glory  of  Shiloh,  the  site  of  which  is  adduced 
to-day  as  a  witness  for  these  pages. 

The  Great  Altar  of  Sacrifice. 

On  entering  the  Tabernacle  court  by  either  of  its 
openings,  we  find  ourselves  opposite  to  the  brasen  ^  altar 
of  sacrifice.  This  is  so  called  in  these  pages  in  order  to 
distinguish  it  from  a  small  altar,  which  had  its  place 
within  the  holy  chambers,  and  was  known  as  the  golden 
altar  of  incense. 

(A)    Approaching  the   great   altar,  we   find  it  raised 

1  This  is  the  spelling  of  this  word  in  the  R.V.  passim. 


DIMENSIOiSrS    OF    GREAT    ALTxiE.       179 

above  the  ground,  by  being  placed  on  a  platform  of  sods 
or  unhewn  stone.  No  specific  instructions  as  to  the  height 
and  size  of  this  platform  are  given,  thus  permitting  of 
its  enlargement  from  time  to  time.  Its  existence  is 
involved  in  the  directions  given  as  to  the  material  of  its 
composition,  and  as  to  the  mode  by  which  it  was  to  be 
ascended.  These  may  be  found  in  the  last  verses  of 
Exodus  XX.,  the  word  '  altar '  in  verses  24  and  25  being 
understood  of  the  altar-base,  and  in  verse  26  of  the  altar 
itself.^  Steps  were  not  to  be  used  for  the  ascent  to  the 
altar  proper,  and  to  the  end  of  the  Mosaic  economy  it 
will  be  found  that  the  great  altar  was  always  reached 
by  an  inclined  plane  or  slope. 

Mounting  this,  the  worshippers  stood  beside  the  altar 
of  acacia-wood,  overlaid  with  brass.  A  full  description 
of  this  is  given  in  the  first  eight  verses  of  Exodus  xxvii., 
and  if  the  scale  of  the  ordinary  cubit  be  applied  to  this 
specification  it  will  be  seen  that  the  original  altar  of  the 
Tabernacle  had  the  appearance  of  a  large  shallow  box, 
which,  when  placed  upon  level  ground,  required  neither 
steps  nor  slope  to  reach  its  topmost  ledge,  or  any  part  of 
its  receptacle  for  sacrificial  meats.  It  was  but  three  cubits 
(=  3f  feet)  in  height,  and  was  six  feet  in  the  square.^ 


1  The  altar  proper  was  a  box  of  acacia-wood,  covered  with  brass  plates, 
and  could  noty  therefore,  be  the  same  as  the  altar  of  earth  or  unhewn  stone. 
In  Ezra  iii.  3  we  read,  '  they  set  the  altar  upon  its  base.' 

2  If  we  suppose  the  altar  to  have  stood  upon  a  base  of  two  cubits  in  height, 
it  would  then  have  the  three  dimensions  of  a  cube,  being  six  feet  in  height. 
With  the  example  of  the  cubic  shape  of  the  Holy  of  Holies  before  them,  this 
was  almost  certainly  the  case.  In  the  holy  city  seen  by  John  the  length  and 
the  breadth  and  the  height  of  it  were  equal  (Revelation  xxi.  16). 


180  THE    TABERNACLE. 

It  is  tlius  seen  that  priests  desirous  of  placing  on  its 
grating  sacrificial  portions  of  offerings  to  be  burnt  had 
no  need  to  do  more  than  stand  beside  the  altar,  and  upon 
some  portion  of  the  raised  platform,  the  surface-level  of 
which  had  been  reached  by  the  slope  seen  in  the  drawing. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  two  such  slopes  are  drawn.  And 
for  this  reason : — The  altar  was  always  approached  from 
the  east;  in  like  manner  as  the  court  of  the  Tabernacle 
was  entered  from  the  east.  It  was  the  most  highly  valued 
privilege  of  every  worshipping  Hebrew  to  stand  beside 
the  altar  at  the  crisis  of  his  devotions,  or  when  the  fat 
of  his  sacrifice  was  being  consumed  upon  it.^  The  touch 
of  the  brasen  altar  brought  forgiveness  and  sanctity 
to  the  sincere  penitent.  No  passage  of  the  Law  was  to 
him  more  significantly  dear  than  that  which  proclaimed, 
*  Whosoever  toucheth  the  altar  shall  be  holy  '  (Exodus 
xxix.  37). 2  We  have  the  New  Testament  complement 
of  this  in  the  miracle  of  healing  wrought  on  the  woman 
who  touched  the  hem  of  Jesus'  garment,  as  well  as  in 
many  other  of  His  miracles. 

As,  therefore,  every  son  and  daughter  of  Abraham  who 
obtained  permission  to  enter  the  court  of  the  Tabernacle 
availed  himself  of  the  right  to  touch  the  brasen  altar,  we 
are  to  infer,  on  the  great  feast  days  of  the  Jewish  Church, 


^  '  I  will  wash  my  hands  in  innocency ;  so  will  I  compass  Thine  altar, 
0  Lord'  (Psalms  xxvi.  6). 

'The  altar  that  sanctifieth  the  gift'  (Matthew  xxiii.  19).  This  was  an 
extension  of  the  same  principle,  from  persons  to  things  inanimate. 

2  The  same  sanctity  attached  to  the  tent  of  meeting  and  all  its  contents, 
to  the  laver,  and  to  all  the  vessels  of  the  altar  (Exodus  xxx.  26-29).  These, 
however,  neither  Levites  nor  people  were  allowed  to  touch. 


POSITION    OF    GREAT    ALTAR  181 

a  constant  stream  of  suppliants  ascending  by  the  east 
slope  and  descending  by  the  south  slope.  That  in  the 
Temples  the  descent  and  exit  were  to  the  south  will  be 
shown  in  later  pages  of  these  volumes :  the  slopes  them- 
selves always  being  of  the  same  width  as  the  altar  to 
which  they  led. 

(B)  What  was  afterwards  called  the  '  bosom  '  of  the 
altar  ^  now  merits  a  moment's  attention.  This  was  the 
hollow  space  in  which  the  fat  of  all  sacrifices,  and  the 
sacrificial  joints  of  all  burnt-offerings,  were  placed,  so  as 
to  be  consumed  by  the  fire  which  burned  below.  A  brass 
grating,  in  one  or  more  pieces,  formed  the  bottom  or  floor 
of  this  receptacle.  This  was  placed  half-way  up  the  altar, 
and  rested  upon  interior  ledges.  The  fire  itself,  divinely 
kindled  and  never  allowed  to  go  out,  burned  on  the 
hearth,  i.e.  on  the  upper  surface  of  the  platform,  which 
was  about  21  inches  below  the  grating  (Exodus  xxxviii. 
1-7)  .2 

(C)  It  is  most  desirable  to  fix  the  exact  position  of 
the  altar  with  relation  to  the  Tabernacle.  These  two 
divinely-ordered  erections  cannot  rightly  be  said  to  occupy 
first  and  second  places  in  regard  to  each  other.  Hence 
it  is  improper  to  say  either  that  the  Tabernacle  belonged 
to  the  altar  or  the  altar  to  the  Tabernacle.  Each  had  its 
own  court  or  square,  and  in  that  had  the  first  place. 


^  Ezekiel  xliii.  13,  margin. 

2  The  distinction  between  these  is  referred  to  in  Ezekiel  xliii.  15,  where 
the  hearth,  on  the  upper  surface  of  the  platform,  is  spoken  of  as  Ariel ^  or  the 
Lion  of  God,  owing  to  its  fiery  powers  of  destruction.  The  actual  altar  that 
stood  above  this  is  called  SareL  the  Mountain  of  God. 


182  THE    TABERNACLE. 

From  Exodus  xl.  29,  and  Leviticus  i.  5  ;  iv.  7,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  tbat  the  altar  was  brought  as  near  to 
the  Tabernacle  as  possible  ;  other  factors  show  that  its 
western  edge  was  placed  on  the  Soreg,  or  boundary-line 
which  separated  the  two  courts.^  This  involved  that  a  part 
of  the  platform  on  which  it  stood  should  have  been  built 
in  the  inner  court,  as  is  shown  in  the  outline-plan  of 
the  court  and  Tabernacle  already  given  (p.  171).  This 
arrangement  was  continued  in  the  temples. 

Philo,  an  Alexandrian  Jew,  who  wrote  40  a.d.,  says 
that  the  two  sides  and  the  back  of  the  Tabernacle  court, 
i.e.  the  clear  spaces,  were  all  of  equal  width,  whereas  the 
space  in  front  was  fifty  cubits  square. 

This  position  for  the  Tabernacle  within  its  court  is 
quite  in  harmony  with  the  fitness  of  things,  and  is  one 
that  would  commend  itself  to  the  orderly  and  reverential 
mind  of  the  early  Hebrew.  By  adopting  it  in  the 
accompanying  drawings,  and  giving  to  each  side  of 
the  platform  a  length  of  18  feet,^  we  find  that  there 
was   just   room   for   the   brasen   laver  in    its   appointed 


1  The  line  of  the  Soreg,  on  each  side  of  the  6  feet  altar,  to  the  edge  of 
the  court  was  ZA\  feet.  The  spaces,  alternately  filled  and  unfilled,  were 
conjecturally  each  2|  cuhits  ( =  3  feet)  in  width.  Ten  such  were  on  either 
hand,  leaving  a  space  of  4|-  feet  on  the  platform  where  the  priests  might  pass 
and  repass.  There  was  thus  an  indication  of  the  Soreg,  on  the  platform,  of 
eighteen  inches. 

2  As  the  platform  had  relations  in  size  with  the  altar,  which  was  built  in 
medium  cubits,  and  with  the  width  of  the  court,  which  was  measured  in  large 
cubits,  it  is  necessary  to  find  a  figure  which  is  commensurate  vaih.  both.  This 
is  found  in  the  identity  of  twelve  large  cubits  and  fifteen  medium  cubits,  each 
being  18  feet.  This  gave  a  walk  six  feet  wide  on  each  of  the  four  sides  of 
the  altar. 


PEE-TABEHNACLE   TENT   OF  WORSHIP.     183 

place    '  between    tlie    tent    of  meeting    and    tlie    altar ' 
(Exodus  XXX.  18).^ 

There  was  thus  no  passage-way  between  the  altar  and 
the  Tabernacle,^  a  fact  which  is  full  of  profound 
significance  to  the  devout  mind.  This  was  all  the  more 
striking,  as  it  was  on  the  western  corners  of  the  altar 
that  the  sacrificial  and  atoning  blood  was  sprinkled,  the 
remainder  being  poured  out  into  the  drain  at  its  foot. 

The  Tent  of  the  Tabernacle. 

Any   proposed   delineation   or   model   of   the    tent    of 

meeting,  which  does  not  allow  of  a  distinction  being  made 

between  the  Tabernacle  and  the  tent  of  the  Tabernacle, 

must  err  in  a  point  of  palmary  importance.      It  is  to 

be  observed  that  there  was,  in  the  wilderness  of  Sinai, 

both    an   altar  and    a   tent  of  meeting,   before  there  was 

a    Tabernacle.      Immediately  after   the  covenant   of  the 

Ten  Commandments  had  been   ratified  by  their  formal 

popular  acceptance,  Moses  built  an  altar  under  the  Mount, 

and  set  up,  near  it,  twelve  memorial  pillars,  one  for  each 

of  the  Tribes  of  Israel  (Exodus  xxiv.  4).     It  was  when 

standing   beside    this  altar    and    these    pillars   that    the 

people  were  cleansed  with  the  *  blood  of  sprinkling.* 

^  A  section  of  the  inner  court,  taken  from  west  to  east,  -would  give: — 

Space  behind  Tabernacle 13  cubits  =19^  feet. 

Length  of  Tabernacle       32  cubits  =  48      ,, 

Space  for  layer       1  cubit   =    1^    ,, 

Projecting  portion  of  altar-base  ...       4  cubits  =6     ,, 

50  75 

2  The  blood  of  some  sacrifices  "w-as  sprinkled  '  upon  the  side  of  the  altar ' 
(Leviticus  v.  9).  That  of  others,  '  round  about  upon  the  altar '  (Lev.  i.  5).  In 
neither  case  would  the  priest  require  to  stand  between  the  altar  and  the  Temple. 


184  THE    TABERNACLE. 

After  the  account  of  the  first  forty  days  spent  in  the 
Mount  (Exodus  xxiv.  18)  we  have  the  curious  stateaient 
that  Moses  used  to  take  the  tent  and  to  pitch  it  without 
the  camp,  afar  off  from  the  camp,  and  he  called  it  the 
tent  of  meeting  (Exodus  xxxiii.  7).  By  which  we  are 
to  understand  that  the  outspread  covering  forming  the 
tent  proper  was  carried  to  and  fro  between  the  camp 
and  the  altar,  and  was  hung  upon  the  twelve  pillars 
standing  there  only  on  Sabbaths  and  at  such  times  as 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  was  in  progress. 

This  temporary  arrangement  was  ended  by  the 
realization  of  the  vision  shown  to  Moses  during  his 
second  stay  of  forty  days  in  the  Mount  (Exodus  xxxiv.  28), 
when  the  plan  of  the  altar  and  of  a  permanent  and 
portable  place  of  worship  was  showed  to  him,  being  the 
pattern  of  things  in  the  Heavens. 

During  the  five  or  six  months  in  which  the  new 
Tabernacle  was  being  built  (it  was  reared  up  on  the 
first  day  of  the  second  year  of  the  Exodus)  the  old 
transition  state  of  affairs  remained,  and  divine  worship 
continued  at  the  altar  and  pillars  which  stood  at  the 
nether  part  of  the  Mount. 

We  cannot  conceive,  the  twelve  tribes  remaining,  that 
the  twelve  memorial  pillars  of  witness  standing  for  them 
and  on  their  behalf,  beside  the  altar,  should  have  suffered 
any  alteration  of  number  in  the  new  erection.  As  the 
names  of  the  tribes  were  engraven  on  the  twelve  stones 
of  the  breastplate,  so  the  dedicated  pillars  of  the  new 
Tabernacle  could  not  be  other  than  twelve  in  number. 

The  recognition  of  this  principle  of  continuity  brings 


PILLAES    OF    THE    TABERNACLE.       185 

into  view  the  first  element  of  the  teut  of  the  Tabernacle 
which  is  to  claim  our  attention.  It  is  that  of  the  three 
pillars  which  supported  the  ridge  -  pole  of  the  tent. 
These  are  not  expressly  mentioned  in  the  accounts  given 
to  us  of  the  Tabernacle,  either  in  its  specification  or 
its  description.  But  their  existence  is  necessary,  not 
only  to  retain  the  number  of  pillars  in  the  Tabernacle 
as  twelve,  four  and  five  others  being  mentioned,  but 
also  to  support  the  ridge  -  pole,  which  is  spoken  of  as 
*the  middle-bar,  passing  through  in  the  midst  of  the 
boards  from  the  one  end  to  the  other'  (Exodus  xxxvi.  33). 
These  pillars  being  granted  as  essential  to  the  support 
of  the  tent  (as  distinguished  from  the  Tabernacle),  we 
have  to  consider  next  the  covering  curtains,  which 
stretched  across  the  ridge-pole  and,  fastened  down  on 
either  side  by  tent-pegs,  formed  the  outer  covering  of  the 
holy  chambers,  and  is  referred  to  in  the  closing  chapter 
of  Exodus  (xl.  18-19)  in  the  distinctive  double  record — 
*  And  Moses  reared  up  the  Tabernacle  ....  and  he 
spread  the  tent  over  the  Tabernacle  and  put  the  covering 
of  the  tent  above  upon  it.' 


The  Eleven  Curtains. 

In  the  above  citation  we  have  brought  before  us  the 
two  elements  of  which  the  covering  of  tbe  tent  consisted, 
there  being  now  no  question  of  the  Tabernacle,  or  any 
portion  of  it,  within  view.  These  two  elements  were : 
the  woven  fabric  which  formed  the  outspread  tent 
proper ;  and  its  '  covering '  which,  from  the  name  given 


186 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


to  it,  we  know  to  have  been  its  outer  protection  against 
tlie  vicissitudes  of  the  weather — rain,  hail,  sun,  and  storm. 


mm 


The  Eleven  Curtains. 

{The  shading  shows  the  portions  of  covering  which  overhang  ends 
and  sides.) 


"%<  H  H 


>o 


iS!o 


'^^ 


^ 


H-h: 


Scale  op  Medium  Cubits. 
-^o  2o  3o 


Scale  of  English  Feet. 

The  former  of  these,  the  tent-spread,  was  ordered  to  be 
woven  in  eleven  strips,  and  to  be  composed  of  goat's  hair, 
dyed  in  three  colours.^     It  is  the  width  given  to  these 

1  Five  curtains  were  blue,  three  scarlet,  and  three  purple.  It  may  not  be 
altogether  chimerical  to  give  some  traditions  as  to  the  shades  of  the  colours 
employed.     The  blue  was  that  of  the  wild  hyacinth  flower,  or  that  of  the 


THE  ELEVEN  CUETAINS  OF  THE  TENT.  187 

eleven  curtains  which,  has  hitherto  been  a  stumbling- 
block  to  all  restorers  of  the  Tabernacle.  The  late 
James  Fergusson,  writing  in  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary, 
declares  the  problem  to  have  been  till  then  insoluble. 
It  is  true  that  he  advances  a  theory,  which,  being  based 
upon  the  assumption  that  there  was  but  a  single  cubit- 
length,  is  as  inadmissible  as  any  that  had  preceded  it. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  state  the  conclusions  to  which 
we  are  brought  by  the  new  theory  of  the  triple-cubit,  as 
derived  from  Babylonia,  and  embodied  in  the  erections 
described  in  the  chapters  of  this  volume.  Before  doing 
so,  however,  it  is  necessary  to  deal  with  another  factor  of 
the  area  to  be  covered  in,  hitherto  unmentioned. 

That  factor  is  the  porch  which  stood  before  the 
Tabernacle.  Here,  again,  we  are  met  by  the  brevity  and 
ambiguity  of  the  Hebrew  records.  When  once  the  clue  to 
the  structural  meaning  of  the  writers  has  been  obtained, 
it  is  not  difficult  so  to  follow  it  as  to  find  in  the  pages  of 
the  Pentateuch  abundant  proofs  of  there  having  been 
a  porch,  and  to  discover  many  references  to  it  in  the 
terminology  of  the  Old  Testament.  Josephus  shall  be 
our  guide  here.  From  his  Antiquities  of  the  Jews  we 
learn  that  the  Tabernacle  consisted  of  three  parts,  into 
two  of  which  the  priests  went  daily  in  the  course  of  their 
ministrations.  But  into  the  third  the  High-priest  went 
but   occasionally.      This   we   know    to    have    been    the 


colour  of  a  sapphire  stone.  The  purple  was  akin  to  that  of  porphpy. 
Some  of  the  later  Roman  royal  statues  have  the  heads  of  marble  and  the 
dress  of  porphyry,  as  representing  the  actual  colour  of  the  robe.  The  scarlet 
was  of  a  blood-red  colour. 


188  THE    TABERNACLE. 

Holy  of  Holies.  The  middle  one  of  the  three  spaces 
was  that  known  as  the  Holy  Place,  *  wherein  were  the 
candlestick,  and  the  table,  and  the  shew-bread'  (Hebrews 
ix.  2).  Outside  of  this  was  a  third  space,  presumably  of 
the  same  area  as  the  Holy  of  Holies,  to  which  is  given 
the  name  of  the  Porch,  though  this  was  not  its  designation 
till  the  building  of  the  Temple.  In  Exodus,  Leviticus, 
and  Numbers,  it  is  usually  spoken  of  as  *  the  door  of  the 
Tabernacle.'  A  previous  section  of  this  chapter  has 
already  shown  to  us  the  Eastern  and  archaic  meaning 
of  the  word  *  gate,'  as  a  defined  space,  and  not  a  mere 
entrance -threshold  or  passage-way.  In  harmony  with 
this  meaning  is  that  of  the  word  *door'  as  used  in  the 
description  of  the  Tabernacle,  now  before  us. 

The  adoption  of  this  ancient  signification  as  applied  to 
the  texts  in  which  the  *  door  of  the  Tabernacle '  is  spoken 
of,  will  at  once  relieve  us  of  two  great  architectural 
difficulties  which  have  till  now  baffled  all  reconstructions. 

One  of  these  is  the  allocation  of  the  five  pillars.  These 
are  spoken  of  as  being  the  five  pillars  for  the  screen 
of  the  door  of  the  tent,  and  as  standing  in  five  sockets 
of  brass.  It  is  not,  however,  necessary  to  suppose,  as 
does  Fergusson,  that  all  the  five  pillars  were  used 
simultaneously  on  which  to  hang  the  screen  of  the 
door.  All  were  provided  with  golden  hooks  for  this 
purpose,  as,  in  a  portable  structure,  sometimes  one  pillar 
would  be  used  and  sometimes  another.  All  had  their 
capitals  and  fillets  gilded,  with  the  same  object  of  inter- 
changeability.     The  screen,  which  bad  a  requisite  width 


THE    SCREEN    OF    THE    TABERNACLE.      189 

of  twelve  feet  only,  was  hung  upon  two  of  the  pillars  at 
its  two  upper  corners/  the  centre  of  the  screen  being 
supported  (if  necessary)  by  an  attachment  to  one  of  the 
three  tent-poles  which  stood  in  the  same  line  as  the  two 
inner  pillars. 


y 


tfni/Nir 


m 

M 


V 


The  Screen  of  the  Tabernacle. 


lo     5'      o 

In  N  M  H  Kfe 


Scale  of  Medium  CrBiTS. 


-^o 


# 


Scale  of  English  Feet. 


B}''  this  arrangement  of  the  five  pillars,  as  figured  upon 
the  Tabernacle  plan  (p.  171),  we  avoid  Fergusson's  departure 


1  Like  the  veil  of  the  inner  sanctuary,  the  screen  of  the  door  was  hung  on 
the  inner  or  western  face  of  its  supporting  piUars.  As  it  was  rectangular,  and 
fifteen  cubits  or  eighteen  feet  in  length,  it  passed  upward  between  the  eighth 
and  ninth  curtains  of  the  tent.  These  being  coupled  together  by  a  single 
attachment  at  their  centre,  permitted  of  this.  This  single  coupling  likewise 
permitted  of  the  three  and  the  eight  curtains  being  hung  at  different  angles, 
as  shown  in  the  accompaming  representations.  The  portion  of  the  tent 
which  covered  the  Tabernacle  was  thus  *  screened '  from  the  view  of 
worshippers  while  standing  around  the  altar. 


190  THE    TABERNACLE. 

from  the  text  in  having  six  such  pillars.  We  also  gain  the 
third  space  claimed  by  Josephus  in  his  AntiquitieSy  III.  vi. 
§  4,  and  vii.  §  7.  Thirdly,  we  satisfy  the  requirements 
of  the  text  as  to  the  conjoined  width  of  the  eleven 
curtains  of  goat's  hair. 

These  requirements  are  that  each  of  the  eleven  curtains 
should  have  a  width  of  four  cubits  (=4-|  feet),  giving 
a  total  width,  when  conjoined,  of  52|-  feet.  Of  the  eleven, 
one  was  deducted  from  this  extension  by  being  hung,  in 
halves,  over  either  end  of  the  tent,  leaving  48  feet  of 
curtaining  to  deal  with.  The  application  of  the  medium 
cubit  to  the  Tabernacle  boards  will  show  that  the  Holy 
of  Holies  was  a  cube  of  12  feet,  and  that  the  Holy  Place 
had  a  length  of  24  feet.  To  these  we  must  now  add  the 
area  of  the  newly-recovered  porch,  which  we  suppose  to 
have  had  a  floor-superficies  of  12  feet  square.  In  these 
three  areas  we  have  the  space  required  to  be  covered  in 
by  the  48  feet  of  which  the  goats'-hair  curtain  consisted, 
when  its  component  parts  were  placed  side  by  side  and 
coupled  together,  one  width  having  been  deducted  for 
flap- ends. 

The   Eam-skins  dyed   red. 

The  eleven  curtains  of  woven  goats'  hair  formed  the 
tent  proper.  This  was  spread  over  the  Tabernacle,  and 
there  was  prepared  for  it  a  special  *  covering '  in  order 
to  its  preservation.  This  was  put  '  above  upon  it,'  as 
stated  in  Exodus  xl.  19. 

In  the  LXX.  version  of  Exodus  xxvi.  7  the  translation 
of  the  Greek  reading  is,  *  Thou  shalt  make  for  a  covering 


EXTERNAL    COYEEINGS.  191 

of  the  Tabernacle  skins  with  the  hair  on/  These  were 
the  ram-skins,  dyed  red,  which  we  are  told  the  people 
contributed  for  this  purpose. 

There  is  no  reason  to  conclude  that  these  skins  were 
those  of  sheep  rather  than  those  of  goats.  The  probability 
is  the  other  way,  the  inner  ten  curtains  being  woven  of 
wool,  the  outer  eleven  of  goats'  hair.  The  presumption 
is  that  the  skins  sewn  together,  with  the  hair  unremoved, 
which  rested  on  the  latter,  were  those  of  goats,  as  the 
Hebrew  prejudice  against  commingling  is  well  known. 
"Not  onl}^  are  the  skins  of  goats  more  durable  than  those 
of  sheep,  and  therefore  fitter  for  this  purpose,  but  the 
fact  of  their  being  dyed  red  would  seem  to  indicate  that 
this  was  done  to  avoid  the  exhibition  of  the  many  colours 
common  to  goat- skins.  With  the  hair  turned  one  way  ia 
making  up,  these  skins  would  form  an  outer  covering, 
impervious  to  rain. 

Besides  the  outer  covering  to  the  tent  of  goat-skins 
dyed  red,  there  was  also  a  covering  of  porpoise  hides  above 
that  {margin,  Exodus  xxvi.  14). 

I  apprehend  this  to  have  been  merely  a  series  of  these 
waterproof  skins  which  lay  above  the  ridge-pole,  and 
protected  the  central  seam  of  the  goat-skins. 

I  am  confirmed  in  this  view  by  a  remark  in  the  Jewish 
treatise  on  the  Tabernacle,  cited  by  Barclay  {Talmud, 
p.  338),  that  the  covering-above  of  the  tent  was  'like 
patchwork,'  i.e.  like  a  piece  of  cloth  upon  a  garment. 
To  this  may  be  added  the  fact,  recorded  in  the  4th  chapter 
of  Numbers,  that  on  the  removal  of  the  Tabernacle  from 


192  THE    TABERNACLE. 

one  site  to  another,  certain  articles  of  its  furniture  were 
to  be  wrapped  in  these  porpoise-skins.  They  were  these 
six :  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  the  table  of  shew-bread, 
the  golden  candlestick,  the  altar  of  incense,  the  brasen 
altar  of  sacrifice,  and  all  the  vessels  used  in  the  sanctuary. 
It  is  thus  evident  that  these  porpoise-skins  were  not  sewn 
together,  and  that  they  were  at  least  six  in  number. 

Porpoise  hides  are  still  a  valuable  trade  commodity  on 
the  shores  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  an  ancient  Cuneiform 
inscription  states  that  *  skins  of  sea-calves '  were  amongst 
the  articles  of  tribute  sent  by  Hezekiah  to  Sennacherib. 
There  is  every  reason,  therefore,  to  infer  that  they  were 
used  in  the  construction  of  the  Tabernacle  at  Sinai,  as 
porpoises  have  always  abounded  in  the  Gulfs  of  Suez  and 
of  Akabah. 


193 


CHAPTER    II. 

THE    TABERNACLE    WITHIN 
THE    TENT. 

rPHE  Tent  [=^ohel)  which  was  the  covering  thereof,' 

-■-  having  been  shown  to  have  been  a  secondary  and 
separate  construction  to  the  Tabernacle  {=  mi-Man),  we 
are  now  in  a  position  to  deal  with  the  fabric  which  was 
the  ordained  place  of  meeting  for  Jehovah  and  His  people, 
as  represented  in  the  person  of  their  High-priest. 

"We  are  thus  at  liberty  to  assume  that  the  command 
*  Let  them  make  Me  a  sanctuary '  (Exodus  xxv.  8)  was 
an  entirely  new  idea  to  the  faithful,  and  marked  a  distinct 
epoch  in  the  religious  history  of  the  world. 

The  way  in  which  this  command  was  carried  out  is 
now  to  engage  our  attention,  and  it  may  be  of  advantage 
to  know  that  no  insuperable  difficulties  will  be  met  with, 
either  in  the  piecing  together  of  its  various  parts  or  in 
the  placing  of  the  whole  within  the  limits  of  the  tent 
built  for  its  protection  and  seclusion. 

1.    The  Floor  of  the  Tabernacle. 

As  both  tent  and  Tabernacle  were  constructed  with 
the  idea  of  their  removal  from  place  to  place,  it  may  be 


194  THE    TABERNACLE. 

advisable  to  deal,  first,  with  the  way  in  which  stability 
was  given  to  the  framework  of  the  latter.  Each  of  its 
forty-eight  boards  had  two  tenons  morticed  into  every 
board.  These  tenons,  when  in  use,  were  placed  in  sockets 
of  silver,  there  being  ninety-six  such  sockets  for  the  forty- 
eight  boards,  and  four  others  for  the  four  pillars  of  the 
veil — 100  in  all.  Each  socket  was  cast  or  wrought  in 
a  talent  of  silver,  and  was  of  considerable  weight.^ 
I  do  not  think  that  these  sockets  were  driven  into  the 
ground,  or  even  placed  in  holes  dug  for  the  purpose, 
but  that  they  were  placed  on  carefully  levelled  ground, 
and  a  stone  pavement  built  up  around  them.  This  form 
of  masonry  was  largely  used  in  the  Temples  on  Mount 
Zion,  and  I  incline  to  the  belief  that  it  was  adopted 
there  from  the  usage  of  the  Tabernacle.  In  Exodus 
xl.  18  the  sockets  are  said  to  have  been  '  laid.* 

A  further  consideration,  looking  in  the  same  direction, 
is  this : — In  the  vision  of  the  God  of  Israel  given  to  the 
seventy  elders  and  others,  described  in  Exodus  xxiv., 
'there  was  under  His  feet  as  it  were  a  paved  work  of 
sapphire  stone.*  This  revelation  was  given  before  that 
of  the  Tabernacle,  and  would  be  associated  with  it  in  the 
minds  of  the  beholders.  It  is,  therefore,  probable  that 
the  floor  of  the  Tabernacle  and  tent  was  at  all  times 
paved  with  stone — a  precaution  easy  to  be  carried  out 

1  Professor  Petrie  estimates  the  weight  of  a  talent  of  gold  at  135  lbs,  troy, 
and  to  contain  160  cubic  inches  of  gold  (Hastings'  Dictionary,  art.  Goldsmith). 
The  same  weight  of  silver  would  produce  a  brick  of  half-a-cubit  (=7*2  inches) 
in  length  (which  dimension,  or  some  fraction  thereof,  is  imperative),  of  the 
same  height,  and  of  half  the  same  width,  when  the  socket  had  been 
allowed  for. 


THE    WALLS    OF    THE    TABERNACLE.      195 

in  the  desert,  and  necessary  to  the  cleanliness  of  the 
building.  The  present  paving  on  Mount  Moriah  may  be 
a  relic  of  this  early  custom.     It  is  five  acres  in  extent. 

2.    The  Boards  of  the  Tabernacle. 

1.  "We  have  an  exact  account  of  the  forty-eight  boards 
or  planks  which,  when  placed  on  end,  formed  three  of 
the  four  sides  of  the  Tabernacle.  Of  these,  twenty  stood 
on  the  north  side  and  twenty  on  the  south  side  of  the 
Tabernacle.  Six  others  formed  the  west  wall,  and  two 
were  the  corner-pieces  of  the  erection.  These  last  are 
described^  as  having  been  cut,  in  a  single  piece,  out  of 
the  trunk  of  a  tree,  and  so  adzed  and  hollowed  as  to  form 
an  angle,  not  requiring  the  use  of  pegs  or  nails.  This  is 
taken  to  be  the  primary  meaning  of  the  rather  laboured 
description  in  the  24th  verse  of  Exodus  xxvi. 

"With  the  secret  of  the  cubit-length  before  us,  it  should 
not  be  impossible  to  discover  the  exact  size  of  the  forty- 
eight  boards.  The  text  informs  us  as  to  two  of  their 
dimensions.  Josephus  shall  aid  us  as  to  their  third.  Ten 
cubits  being  stated  to  be  the  length  of  each  board,  we 
take  twelve  English  feet  as  the  equivalent  of  this. 
A  cubit  and  a  half  being  the  breadth  of  each  board,  we 
may  know  that  it  was  21f  inches  in  width.     These  are 


1  By  Josephus  in  loco.  His  words  are,  '  They  made  two  other  pillars,  and 
cut  them  out  of  one  cubit,  which  they  placed  in  the  comers.'  The  meaning 
evidently  is,  that  the  tree-stem  when  squared  was  a  cubit  square.  This  was 
then  cut  out,  on  two  of  its  sides,  so  as  to  leave  an  angle  of  a  palm  in  thick- 
ness. The  cubit  here  is  thus  one  of  three  hand-breadths,  as  the  total 
measurements  show. 


196 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


measures  that  are  not  impossible,  when  we  remember 
that  the  Sinaitic  peninsula  still  contains  trees  from  which 
such  planks  may  be  cut,  and  that  it  was  more  thickly 
wooded  in  ancient  times  than  it  is  now. 


The  Forty-eight  Boards. 


^ 


t5cct.le     of    MGcflitm     Ct^hlts. 


Joo  Jtro 


,Scale  or  Enf^Lish  Ihet,. 


As  to  the  thickness  of  each  plank,  Josephus  tells  us 
{AntiquitieSj  III.  vi.  §  3)  that  they  were  four  fingers  in 
thickness,  and  again,  in  the  same  paragraph,  that  the 
thickness  was  the  third  part  of  a  span.  We  thus  arrive 
at  the  conclusion  that  the  palm  of  3 '6  inches  was  taken 
as  the  standard  of  their  through-measure,  and  that  three 


HOLY    CHAMBERS    EXACT    IN    SIZE.      197 

such  palms  made  a  span  or  small  cubit,  which  testimony 
is  in  harmony  with  all  that  we  learn  elsewhere  on  each 
of  these  points. 

2.  We  now  come  to  an  architectural  point  of  some 
importance  in  its  bearing  upon  the  internal  measures 
of  the  two  holy  chambers,  which  is  that  of  the  place 
occupied  by  the  veil  which  separated  them,  and  of  the 
screen  which  hid  them.  It  is  this  : — Six  boards,  each 
of  1|  cubits  in  width,  stood  at  the  west  end  of  the 
Tabernacle.  Together,  they  gave  nine  cubits  of  walling, 
leaving  the  tenth  to  be  made  up,  in  halves,  by  the  two 
corner-boards  which  held  the  fabric  together.  It  is 
obvious  that  to  secure  the  ten  cubits  in  width  of  which 
the  Holy  of  Holies  consisted,  this  half-cubit  (=2  palms) 
must  have  been  taken  from  the  inner  angle  of  each  of 
the  corner-boards,  and  not  have  been  their  outside 
measurement.  Thus  far  there  is  no  difficulty  as  to  the 
appropriation  of  the  spaces  created  by  the  up-rearing  of 
the  corner-boards. 

But  one  now  comes  into  view.  It  arises  thus : — On 
either  of  the  two  sides  of  the  Tabernacle,  north  and  south, 
there  stood  twenty  boards,  giving  30  cubits  (=  36  feet). 
This  is  the  measure  of  the  two  chambers  jointly,  one 
being  10  and  the  other  20  cubits  in  length. 

Just  as,  however,  there  was  half- a- cubit  in  each  of 
the  corner  -  boards  added  to  complete  the  west  side,  so 
there  must  have  been  half-a-cubit  to  add  to  the  length 
of  each  of  the  other  sides,  the  angular  shape  of  the 
corner-boards   being  remembered.      This  was,  therefore, 


198  THE    TABERNACLE. 

an  'excess'  above  what  was  required.  Half  an  ordinary- 
cubit,  or  two  palms  width,  was  the  measure  of  this 
excess,  and  its  disposal  has  been  arrived  at  by  the 
creation  of  a  model  of  the  Tabernacle,  in  which  it  is 
found  that  a  space  of  one  palm  (=  3*6  inches)  is  required 
for  the  four  pillars  supporting  the  veil  between  the 
chambers,  and  another  palm  for  the  pillars  of  the  screen 
which  closed  in  the  holy  chambers. 

The  chambers  themselves  were  thus  of  the  exact  interior 
measures  given,  and  the  whole  account  is  justified  as  that 
of  supreme  wisdom  guiding  an  architect  to  the  creation 
of  a  meeting  -  place  for  God  and  man,  in  which  the 
utmost  exactitude  and  simplicity  are  joined  to  the  greatest 
reverence  and  dignity. 

3.    The  Yeil  and  its  Four  Pillars. 

The  Yeil  of  the  Tabernacle  has  for  us  a  peculiar  interest, 
as  it  was  the  only  part  of  the  original  structure  which 
remained  unchanged  while  the  sanctuary  of  God  stood. 
The  first  two  Evangelists  tell  us  that  in  the  Herodian 
Temple  it  was  rent  in  twain  from  the  top  to  the  bottom, 
and  Luke  adds  that  this  total  separation  of  its  parts  was 
'  in  the  midst.'  The  writer  of  Hebrews  x.  20,  in  a  single 
line,  fixes  its  symbolic  meaning  in  the  words,  *  The  veil, 
that  is  to  say,  His  flesh.* 

Known  unto  God  are  all  His  works  from  the  beginning, 
and  a  singular  sanctity  attached  to  the  curtain  which 
divided  the  two  holy  chambers  from  one  another.  The 
material  of  which  it  was  composed  was  wool,  dyed  in  the 


THE    VEIL    OF    THE    SANCTUAEY. 


199 


three  sacred  colours  of  blue,  purple,  and  scarlet.^  This 
formed  the  woof,  the  warp  being  coraposed  of  fine  twined 
linen. ^  To  mark  its  separateness  the  whole  nation  was 
forbidden  to  wear  a  mingled  stuff  —  wool  and  linen 
together^  (Deut.  xxii.  11);  just  as  they  were  forbidden 
to  make  any  unguent  composed  like  the  holy  oil  with 
which  High-priests  were  consecrated. 


The  Inner  Veil. 

The  veil,  being  woven*  in  a  single  piece,  to  a  size  of 
12  feet  square,  which  we  now  know  was  the  size  of  the 
opening  between  the  chambers,  was  then  embroidered  in 
gold  thread  with  the  forms  of  three  or  more  cherubim. 
The  materials  of  which  the  High-priest's  ephod  was 
composed  were  the  same  as  those  of  the  inner  veil,  and 
it  is  in  the  description  of  this  (Exodus  xxxix.  2-3)  that 


1  Both  wool  and  mohair  were  dyed  in  the  bulk  and  spun,  when  presented 
for  weaving  (Exodus  sxv.  25,  26). 

^  *  The  warp  is  nothing  but  fine  linen  '  (Josephus,  Ant.  III.  vii.  §2). 

'  This  was  permitted  to  the  priests  only  (Josephus,  Ant.  IV.  viii.  §  11). 

*  Wea^dng  was  one  of  the  arts  used  (Exodus  xxxv.  35).  The  Bedaween 
women  of  to-day  spin,  dye,  and  weave  wool  and  hair  for  their  tents.  The 
strips  when  woven  are  about  a  yard  wide. 


200  THE    TABERNACLE. 

we  find  an  account  of  how  tlie  work  of  embroidering  tbe 
Cherubs  was  effected.  Tbe  artist  is  always  spoken  of  as 
*  tbe  cunning  workman/  and  bis  gold  embroidery  as  tbe 
work  of  tbe  cunning  workman.  '  Tbey  did  beat  tbe  gold 
into  tbin  plates,  and  cut  it  into  wires,  to  work  it  in  tbe 
blue,  and  in  tbe  purple,  and  in  tbe  scarlet,  and  in  tbe 
fine  linen.* 

Besides  tbe  Higb-priestly  robes  and  tbe  veil  of  tbe 
sanctuary,  tbe  only  otber  fabrics  so  embroidered  were 
the  ten  curtains  wbicb  enclosed  tbe  Tabernacle  in  tbe 
wbole  of  its  length. 

As  to  all  these,  there  is  one  feature  which  calls  for 
remark.  It  is,  that  the  embroidery,  and  possibly  tbe 
woven  tapestry  of  which  the  wbole  set  consisted,  bad  no 
wrong  or  seamy  side.  In  the  subsequent  days  of  the 
Judges  we  have,  in  the  Song  of  Deborah,  a  description  of 
the  spoil  which  it  was  hoped  Sisera  would  take  from  the 
Hebrews.  Its  last  item  was  :  A  spoil  of  divers  colours ; 
a  spoil  of  divers  colours  of  embroidery ;  of  divers  colours, 
embroidered  on  both  sides  (Judges  v.  30). 

Such  was  the  famous  embroidery  work  of  the  Egyptians, 
where  the  art  of  its  creation,  lost  among  ourselves,  still 
survives.  Such  too,  in  all  likelihood,  was  the  goodly 
Babylonish  mantle  which  Achan  coveted  and  stole  at  Ai. 

This  veil  or  curtain,  heavy  with  gold  thread,  but 
having  no  measurable  thickness,  was  bung  upon  the 
inner  side  of  the  four  pillars  ^  which  stood,  in  their  silver 


*  Exodus  xxvi.  33  is  not  to  be  literally  understood,  but  generally,  in  its  first 
clause.     The  '  veil '  was  12  feet  from  the  west  end,  and  the  '  clasps '  18  feet. 


THE    FIGUHED    CURTAINS. 


201 


sockets,  between  the  two  chambers.^  Once  in  every  year 
the  curtain  was  lifted,  and  the  High-priest,  clothed  in 
robes  of  white  linen,  entered,  to  make  atonement  for 
himself  and  for  the  sins  of  the  people. 


The  Ten  Curtains. 


^o 


^ 


^__^ 


S      o 


Scale  or  Small  Cubits. 
_^o  2o  3c»> 


^tG 


Scale  of  English  Feet. 


1  These  four  pillars  would  give  three  inter- columnar  spaces.  If  to  each 
of  these  be  given  a  width  of  three  cubits  (3f  feet),  one  cubit  remains,  in  which 
to  place  the  bases  of  the  pillars.  As  the  cubit  here  used  was  one  of  four 
palms,  it  is  ine\dtable  that  each  pillar  should  have  stood  in  a  square  of 
3-6  inches.  This  was  the  width  of  the  '  excess  '  in  this  part  of  the  Tabernacle, 
as  has  been  already  shown  (pp.  197-198). 


202  THE   TABERNACLE. 

4.    The  Ten  Curtains. 

1.  The  ten  curtains  whicli  overhung  the  Tabernacle 
were  of  similar  make  and  ornamentation  to  the  veil  of  the 
Holy  of  Holies,  already  described.  We  have,  however, 
in  their  case  a  factor  given  in  the  specification  which  we 
have  not  in  the  case  of  the  veil.  It  is  that  of  their 
measurement.  To  them  is  given,  in  Exodus  xxvi.  2, 
a  width  of  4  cubits  and  a  length  of  28  cubits.  Being 
embroidered  with  figures  of  cherubim  worked  in  gold 
thread,  they  naturally  fell  under  the  goldsmith's  measure 
of  construction,  as  we  cannot  suppose  that  difi"erent 
measures  were  used  in  the  preparation  of  the  same 
article.  When  conjoined,  their  width  would  thus  be 
40  small  cubits,  equal  to  30  medium  cubits  (=36  feet). 
Thirty  cubits  and  a  half  being  the  length  of  the 
Tabernacle  boards  when  placed  in  position,  it  will  be 
seen  that  the  ten  curtains  nearly  enclosed  it  on  its 
upper  side.  The  union  of  the  two  sets  of  five  curtains 
in  the  middle  would  allow  of  the  protrusion  there  of 
the  second  tent-pole  of  the  three  which  supported  the 
ridge-bar. 

The  diameter  of  this  tent-pole  we  may  appropriately 
suppose  to  have  been  that  of  a  palm  of  3*6  inches,  in 
which  case  it  is  permissible  to  think  that  the  50  loops  in 
each  selvedge   of  the  two  edge  -  curtains  ^   were  of  this 

1  The  loops  were  of  a  blue  colour  (Exodus  xxvi.  4),  as  also  were  the  five 
non- embroidered  curtains  which  overhung  the  Holy- of- Holies.  This  we 
know  fi'om  the  fact  that  five  such  curtains  are  specified  to  be  used  in  the 
removal  of  the   Tabernacle  furniture    (Numbers  iv.).      These,   of  course, 


VENTILATION    OF    THE    CHAMBERS.      203 

length  when  joined  together.  The  other  palm -length, 
requisite  for  the  fitting  of  the  curtains  so  as  to  wholly 
cover  the  Tabernacle  boards,  was  obtained  by  placing 
the  front  tent -pole  and  the  two  inner  pillars  of  the 
porch  within  the  range  of  the  upright  boards  forming 
the  sides  of  the  Tabernacle.  In  this  way  the  literal 
accuracy  of  the  text  is  preserved,  as  well  as  the 
construction  difficulties  overcome.  We  gain,  at  the  same 
time,  a  reason  for  there  being  so  many  as  50  couplings  in 
the  union  of  each  of  the  two  sets  of  curtains,  they  being 
3'6  inches  apart,  while  there  was  but  a  single  one  in  all 
other  cases,  which  one  was  at  the  centre. 

This  open  space,  overhead,  in  the  middle  of  the 
sanctuary,  served  another  purpose  than  that  of  allowing 
the  passage  of  the  tent-pole. 

Not  only  was  there  the  refuse  air  from  the  seven- 
branched  candlestick  which  was  lit  every  night,  but 
there  were  the  clouds  of  incense,  which  was  burned 
twice  daily  in  the  holy  place,  to  get  rid  of.  It  was 
therefore  in  obedience  to  that  sanitary  law  which 
pervades  the  enactments  by  Moses,  that  there  should  be 
the  means  of  thorough  and  constant  ventilation  in  the 
Tabernacle. 

2.  The  use  of  a  single  cubit-length  in  the  conception 
of   the   Tabernacle   has    hitherto    rendered    abortive    all 


were  the  curtains  of  goats'  hair,  three  others  being  scarlet  and  three  purple. 
It  is  probable  tliat  the  purple  curtains  overhung  the  porch,  as  Josephus,  who 
had  seen  them,  tells  us  that  the  curtains  of  the  porch  in  the  Temple  of  Herod 
were  'purple'  {JFar  of  the  Jews,  VII.  vi.  §  7). 


204  THE    TABERNACLE. 

attempts  at  its  reconstruction.  Two  illustrations  of  the 
difficulties  encountered  may  be  given.  One  is  from  the 
English  translation  of  the  Bible,  1576  a.d.,  known  as 
the  Geneva  or  '  Breeches '  Bible.  A  marginal  note  to 
a  woodcut  of  the  first  covering  of  the  Tabernacle  reads, 
*  Two  curtains  and  a  half  hung  from  the  rear  of  the 
Tabernacle.'  While  in  the  Geynnra  on  the  treatise 
Shabat,  the  Rabbins  say :  *  The  ten  curtains  were  of 
28  cubits.  Take  away  10  for  the  roof,  there  remain 
9  cubits  to  this  side  and  9  to  that.  So  that  one  cubit 
of  the  boards  was  uncovered.' 

It  is  thus  evident  that  while  the  Jewish  authorities  of 
old  days  had  lost  sight  of  the  short  cubit  as  applicable 
to  the  ten  curtains,  they  did  not,  as  did  Mr.  Fergusson, 
suppose  other  than  that  they  hung  directly  over  the 
boards  of  the  Tabernacle.  The  recovery  of  the  true 
length  of  these  curtains — their  width  has  already  been 
dealt  with — enables  us  to  see  that  of  the  length  given  to 
each  and  every  curtain  of  the  ten,  of  25^  feet,  12  were 
taken  to  cover  the  interior  spaces  of  the  two  holy 
chambers.  Of  the  remainder,  ^  of  a  foot,  on  either 
side,  rested  on  the  gilded  boards  of  the  Tabernacle  walls. 
Of  the  remainder  of  each  curtain,  exactly  one-quarter, 
or  6y^^  feet  of  either  end,  hung  down  on  the  outer  side 
of  the  boards.  As  these  boards  were  12  feet  in  length 
above  the  floor,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  they  were  covered 
to  but  little  more  than  one-half  of  their  length.  The 
importance  of  this  conclusion,  so  difierent  from  that  of 
the  Jewish  Rabbis  of  old,  will  presently  appear  in  the 
fact  that  the  priests  on  duty  at  the  Tabernacle  had  their 


THE    TENT    PORTABLE.  205 

resting-places  beneath  the  eaves  of  the  tent.  Had  the 
curtains  fallen  as  low  as  has  been  generally  supposed, 
this  would  have  been  impossible,  owing  to  the  liability 
of  their  being  soiled. 


5.    The  Stability  of  the  Tent. 

1.  The  Tabernacle  and  its  tent  were  for  nearly  three 
centuries  the  central  home  of  Jewish  monotheistic  worship. 
During  these  centuries  portions  of  it  would,  from  time 
to  time,  require  repair  and  renewal.  Of  these  domestic 
details  there  are  naturally  no  records,  if  we  except  the 
statement  of  the  Mischna  that  the  curtains  of  the  last 
Temple  were  renewed  every  j^ear,  and  that  the  material 
of  the  disused  curtains  was  used  as  wicks  for  the  lamps 
of  the  Temple. 

What  is,  perhaps,  of  more  importance  for  us  to  know, 
as  tending  to  the  credibility  of  the  narrative,  is  how, 
during  this  long  period,  the  frail  and  portable  con- 
structions of  tent  and  Tabernacle,  when  once  erected, 
maintained  their  stability  against  the  stress  of  wind  and 
weather. 

Regarding  the  former,  there  can  be  little  doubt,  from 
the  silence  of  Scripture,  that  the  three  tent-poles  on  which 
the  whole  depended  were  placed  in  holes  dug  into  the 
ground,  and  firmly  planted.  They  were  simply  a  transfer 
to  the  new  system  of  the  old  arrangement  by  which  all 
twelve  pillars  stood  beside  the  altar.  Hence  they  were 
neither  placed  in  sockets  of  any  kind,  nor  was  gilding 


206  THE   TABERNACLE. 

applied  to  any  part  of  them.^  Their  height  above  ground 
required  to  be  18  English  feet,  and  we  may  suppose  them 
to  have  been  of  the  not  impossible  length  of  20  feet. 

This  length  was  the  utmost  that  was  required  in  any 
single  piece  of  timber  in  the  whole  fabric,  as  neither  the 
side-bars  nor  the  ridge-bar  (which  was  in  two  pieces) 
required  to  be  of  any  more  than  18  feet.  A  fact  such  as 
this  tends  to  bring  the  whole  account  within  the  region 
of  possibility,  and  goes  some  way  to  dispel  doubts  as  to 
the  historicity  of  the  whole  narrative. 

2.  When  the  three  pillars  of  the  tent  were  placed 
in  position,  and  the  middle,  or  ridge-bar,  was  placed 
above  them,  its  junction  resting  on  the  centre-pole,  the 
eleven  curtains  would  be  stretched  across  it.  Here  comes 
into  view  one  of  the  previsions  of  the  heaven-instructed 
plan.  For  these  eleven  curtains  were  not  sewn  together, 
but  might  be  separately  put  into  their  places.^  It  is 
true  they  were  ^  coupled  together,'  but  this  was  probably 
done  after  their  elevation.  A  single  loop  of  one  was 
placed  within  a  single  opposite  loop  of  its  neighbour, 
and  a  peg  of  brass  (gold  for  the  inner  curtains)  inserted 
to  keep  it  in  its  place.     A  single  button  of  this  kind  was 


1  As  no  directions  as  to  them  were  requisite,  they  are  unmentioned.  The 
want  of  an  historic  imagination  has  long  hid  them  from  sight,  and  it  is 
possible  that  there  are  extreme  literalists  who  still  refuse  to  accept  them. 
Their  recovery  is  due  to  Fergusson,  as  is  that  of  the  centre-bar  or  ridge-poie 
which  they  supported. 

2  This  follows  from  the  minute  instructions  given  in  Numbers  iv.  for  the 
removal  of  the  Tabernacle.  Six  articles  were  to  have  covering  of  porpoise- 
skins,  five  of  curtains  of  blue,  and  one  each  of  scarlet  and  purple. 


THE    CURTAINS    NOT    SEWN.  207 

all  the  attaclimeiit  required.^  This  was  uniformly  placed 
mid  -  centre,  and  hung  above  the  ridge  -  pole.  This 
arrangement  also  made  possible  the  covering  of  the 
porch,  as  shown  in  the  drawing  (p.  166).  To  it  there  was 
one  exception.  Between  the  fifth  and  sixth  curtains  fifty 
such  double  loops  were  specified.  The  reason  for  this 
particular  has  not  yet  been  discovered,  unless  it  were  to 
allow  of  the  escape  of  the  carbonised  air  from  below.  In 
any  case  the  vacant  spaces  of  the  two  sets  of  curtains, 
i.e.  the  ten  and  the  eleven,  were  not  directly  above  one 
another.  That  of  the  lower  set  was  18  feet  from  the  west 
side  of  the  tent,  and  that  of  the  upper  set  21-|  feet  from 
the  same.  In  this  connection  it  will  be  remembered  that 
there  were  two  outer  coverings  to  the  tent  of  goat's  hair, 
one  of  red  goat-skins  and  another  of  porpoise  hides. 
These  were,  probably,  put  on  every  evening  at  the 
closing  of  the  Tabernacle  gates,  and  also  at  every 
appearance  of  bad  weather  during  the  day.  The  incon- 
gruity of  a  narrow  opening  between  the  fifth  and  sixth 
outer  curtain  ^  is,  in  this  way,  met  and  disposed  of. 

3.  We  have  seen  that  the  tent  was  formed  of  two  sets 


^  These  were  the  *  taches '  of  the  Authorized  Version  and  the  '  clasps '  of 
the  Revised  Version. 

'  The  requirements  of  the  space  to  he  covered  in,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
ten  curtains,  demand  that  this  opening  should  he  of  the  "width  of  one  palm, 
or  a  quarter  of  a  cubit.  The  use  of  fifty  loops  in  each  of  the  two  sets  of 
curtains  was  intended  to  secure  a  ventilation-space,  in  each,  of  even  width 
throughout.  It  would,  without  these  frequent  regulators,  have  had  an  irregular 
appearance  and  been  wider  in  some  parts  than  in  others.  "When  this  object 
had  been  gained,  each  of  the  eleven  curtains  would  be  kept  in  its  proper  place 
by  the  straining  of  the  tent  ropes. 


208  THE    TABERNACLE. 

of  woven  curtains,  one  containing  five  and  the  otter  six. 
"We  have  now  to  see  how  these  eleven  curtains  were 
extended  horizontally,  and  kept  in  their  places.  This 
was  done  by  the  familiar  method  of  having  tent-pegs — 
a  method  which  owes  its  early  origin  and  late  survival 
to  the  fact  of  its  ease  and  simplicity. 

In  one  passage  (Exodus  xxxv.  18)  we  have  a  reference 
to  *  the  pins  of  the  Tabernacle,  ....  and  their 
cords,'  and  in  another  (xxxviii.  29-31)  we  learn  that 
these  *pins,'  as  well  as  those  that  supported  the  pillars 
of  the  court  round  about,  were  made  of  brass. 

As  it  was  a  matter  of  the  utmost  importance  that 
these  curtains  should  be  hung  over  the  ridge  -  pole  at 
an  angle  of  90° — neither  more  nor  less — it  may  satisfy 
some  querist  to  know  of  a  simple  method  by  which  this 
could  have  been  done.  The  site  of  the  future  Tabernacle 
having  been  selected  and  levelled,  it  was  but  necessary 
to  lay  these  eleven  curtains  outspread  upon  the  surface 
of  the  ground.  By  marking  their  north  and  south  lines 
when  so  extended,  and  by  driving  the  tent-pegs  deeply 
into  the  ground  at  the  lines  marked,  the  tent  itself 
would  have  a  right  angle  at  its  apex,  the  height  of 
the  ridge  being  18  feet  above  the  ground,  and  the  tent- 
pegs  being  36  feet  apart.  The  east  and  west  lines, 
when  similarly  marked,  would  be  524-  feet  apart,  and 
would  give  the  other  limits  of  the  area  requiring  to 
be  paved. 

4.  The  use  of  the  expression  already  referred  to,  '  all 
the  pins  of  the  court  round  about,'  leaves  no  option  but 


TENT    ROPES    AND    PEGS.  209 

to  think  that  each  of  the  sixty  7^  feet  pillars  of  the  court  ^ 
had  its  own  stay  of  brass  pins  and  cords,  to  keep  it  in 
position  as  it  stood  in  its  brass  socket.  There  could  be 
here  no  question  of  a  supporting  pavement,  so  that  these 
sockets  were  probably  buried  in  the  ground.  Fergusson 
has  represented  these  standards  as  supported  in  this  way. 

5.  "While  the  length  of  each  of  the  eleven  curtains 
was  30  cubits  {=  36  feet),  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  suppose 
that  the  whole  of  this  length  was  extended  horizontally 
in  order  to  form  the  tent.  It  was  not  so,  and  this 
introduces  us  to  one  of  the  most  fruitful  facts  about 
the  Tabernacle  in  its  relation  to  the  Temples  which  took 
its  place. 

From  Exodus  xxvi.  13  we  learn  that  the  cords  which 
attached  the  curtains  to  the  tent-pegs  were  placed  in 
eyelet-holes  at  the  distance  of  a  single  cubit  from  the  ends 
of  the  curtains.  A  relationship  of  28  cubits  was  thus 
established  with  the  28  cubits  of  which  the  ten  curtains 
consisted,  the  fact  of  the  cubits  in  each  of  these  cases 
being  of  different  lengths  notwithstanding. 

There  was  thus  produced  the  mathematical  result  that 
the  line  at  which  the  one-cubit  flap  of  the  eleven  curtains 

^  It  is  not  certain  what  was  the  height  of  the  hangings  of  the  court.  It 
was  either  five  medium  or  five  large  cubits  (Exodus  xxvii.  18  and  xxxviii.  18). 
In  favour  of  the  former  is  the  fact  that  the  medium  cubit  was  that  usually- 
employed  in  weaving  stuffs.  In  favour  of  the  latter,  the  fact  that  in  each 
case  above  refen-ed  to  the  '  five  cubits '  is  associated  with  other  measures 
which  were  undoubtedly  those  of  large  cubits.  The  height  of  the  Ramet 
enclosure  wall  is  six  medium  cubits,  and  is  in  favour  of  the  greater  height  of 
the  Tabernacle  hangings,  as  is  the  fact  that  they  were  woven  in  lengths  of 
five  lar<2:e  cubits. 


210  THE    TABEENACLE. 

hung  down  at  the  eyelet-holes,  marked  one-half  of  the 
ground-space  between  the  Tabernacle  boards  and  the  rows 
of  tent-pegs.  In  other  words,  there  were  on  either  side 
of  the  Tabernacle  five  cubits  (=6  feet)  covered  in  and 
overshadowed  by  the  tent,  and  five  cubits  of  space  over 
which  the  tent  cords  were  strained,  and  which  was  open 
to  the  sky.  In  this  latter  space  it  is  probable  that  drains 
to  carry  ofi"  the  surface-water  were  arranged,  but  whether 
it  was  paved  or  not  there  is  no  evidence  to  show.^ 

6.  It  is  to  the  other  covered -in  space,  which  lay 
without  the  Tabernacle  and  within  the  tent,  that  the 
reader's  attention  is  now  directed.  We  have  here 
a  narrow  strip  of  tent-shadow,  on  either  side  of  the 
Tabernacle.  The  gilded  boards  of  the  Tabernacle,  over- 
hung in  part  by  the  ends  of  the  curtains  of  the  sanctuary, 
form  one  of  its  sides  on  either  hand.  Below  are  the 
paving-stones  supporting  the  silver  sockets  of  the  boards. 
Above  is  the  extension  of  the  goats'-hair  curtains,  and 
towards  the  horizon,  on  either  side,  is  the  fringe  of  the 
outer  curtains  hanging  down  to  the  extent  of  IJ  feet. 
These  two  spaces  we  now  know  to  have  been  each  of  the 
length  of  36  feet  and  of  the  width  of  six  feet,  less  the 
palm    of  which   the   thickness  of  the   boards   consisted. 


^  The  architectural  requirements  of  the  case,  however,  demand  that  the 
same  general  level  of  flooring  should  be  observed  in  the  whole  area.  If  this 
were  not  done  the  apex-angle  of  the  tent  would  not  be  a  right  angle.  The 
whole  area  of  36  x  52f  feet  covered  by  the  cui-tains  when  used  as  a  measuring- 
carpet,  was  probably  laid  with  paving-stones.  This  need  not  have  prevented 
there  being  a  depression  on  either  side  of  the  tent,  to  carry  off  the  surface - 
drainage. 


DOEMITORIES    OF    THE    TENT.  211 

Each  side  would  thus  give  six  little  areas  of  six  feet 
square  —  twelve  iu  all.  In  these,  without  doubt,  the 
priests  on  duty  in  the  Tabernacle  regularly  slept,  and  they 
formed  the  precedent  for  the  priests'  chambers,  which 
were  so  marked  a  feature  of  the  later  Temples,  and  which 
ultimately  gave  rise  to  the  anchorites'  cell  and  the  monastic 
system  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

The  recognition  of  this  use  of  a  portion  of  the  Tabernacle 
will  serve  to  illustrate  many  passages  of  Scripture.  Of 
these  one  of  the  earliest  is  the  account  of  the  death  of 
Aaron's  elder  sons.  These  had  spent  seven  days  and 
nights  at  the  door  of  the  tent  of  meeting,  as  a  part  of 
their  ceremonial  induction  to  the  High-priesthood.  On 
their  death  the  two  younger  sons  were  instructed  to  repass 
the  same  period  of  time  in  meditation,  prayer,  and  sacrifice ; 
and  not  to  go  out  from  the  door  of  the  tent  of  meeting 
under  penalty  of  death.  It  seems  natural  to  suppose  that 
their  hours  of  sleep  were  spent  in  those  recesses  of  the  tent 
which  flanked  the  Tabernacle,  and  which  may  have  been, 
from  its  earliest  use,  the  dormitories  of  the  priests  who 
guarded  the  sacred  shrine  (Lev.  viii.  35-36;  x.  7). 

An  acceptance  of  this  theory  is  alone  wanting  to  make 
the  touching  history  of  the  child  Samuel's  call  to  the 
ministry  intelligible  and  doubly  impressive.  Here,  in 
one  of  these  little  stone-floored  cubicles,  the  aged  Eli  lay, 
doubtless  screened  off  from  all  around  by  mats  or  rugs 
hung  around  as  walls.  In  another  compartment,  possibly 
on  the  other  side  of  the  tent,  little  Samuel  slept,  and  was 
awakened  by  the  Yoice,  thrice  repeated.  '  For  Samuel 
was  laid  down  to  sleep  in  the  Temple  of  the  Lord,  where 


212  THE    TABEENACLE. 

the  ark  of  God  was'  (1  Samuel  iii.  3).  The  only 
alternative  to  the  plan  here  suggested  as  having  been 
adopted,  is  to  suppose  that  both  Eli  and  Samuel  slept 
within  one  of  the  holy  chambers  which  formed  the 
Tabernacle  proper.  To  anj^one  whose  mind  and  memory 
are  imbued  with  the  facts  and  traditions  of  early  Mosaism, 
such  a  contingency  as  this  will  be  impossible  of  acceptance. 

7.  Thus  far  we  have  found  that  the  means  taken  to 
secure  the  stability  of  the  court  of  the  Tabernacle  and 
of  the  tent  of  the  Tabernacle,  were  such  as  to  increase 
their  usefulness  as  well  as  to  ensure  their  continuance. 

We  now  come  to  the  method  by  which  the  boards  of 
the  Tabernacle  themselves  were  preserved  in  their  align- 
ment, and  kept  in  an  upright  and  sj^mmetrical  position. 
It  will  be  plain,  even  to  those  who  have  no  knowledge  of 
the  building  art,  that  rows  of  12  feet  planks  stood  upon 
end,  each  of  the  width  of  21*6  inches,  would  require  more 
support  than  two  tenons  could  give  them,  to  keep  them  in 
a  perfectl}^  perpendicular  line  of  36  feet  from  end  to  end. 

Let  it  be  here  noted  that  specific  instructions  were 
given  to  Moses  that  the  tenons  were  not  to  be  parts  of  the 
boards  themselves.  They  were  to  be  *  morticed'  [mar gin. 
Exodus  xxvi.  17)  into  the  boards,  separately.  This  would 
allow  of  harder  wood  being  used  for  this  purpose  than 
that  of  the  acacia  or  shittim,  and  b}^  this  means  the 
holding  power  of  the  tenons  would  be  greatly  increased. 
But  even  this  provision  was  not  sufficient.  Fifteen  bars 
of  acacia-wood  were  ordered  to  be  made,  five  for  each  of 
the  three  sides  of  the  Tabernacle.     These  bars  were  run 


GILDING    OF    THE    TABERNACLE.        213 

through  rings  of  gold,  by  which  we  are  to  understand 
that  they  were  gilt,  and  had  an  appearance  of  gold.  The 
evidence  for  which  is  this  : — Of  the  48  boards,  24  had  two 
rings  in  each  and  24  three  rings  in  each,  giving  a  total 
of  120  rings.  Each  of  these  must  have  contained  several 
ounces  of  metal,  if  indeed  they  were  not  cut  out  of  wood, 
which  is  possible.  Yet  we  do  not  find  any  appropriation 
of  gold  for  the  purpose  of  making  these  120  rings.  The 
inference  is  that,  like  the  boards  into  which  they  were 
fixed,  and  like  the  bars  which  they  were  to  contain,  they 
were  *  overlaid  with  gold '  ^  (Exodus  xxvi.  32). 

There  can  be  little  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  way 
in  which  the  five  bars  on  each  side  were  placed  with 
regard  to  one  another.  Four  bars,  of  18  feet  each,  being 
run  into  their  rings,  two  above  and  two  below,  the  fifth 
was  used  between  the  upper  and  lower  sets  to  strengthen 
the  '  break '  of  joint.  This  would  give  the  required 
stability  to  the  whole  of  each  side.  The  five  bars  for 
the  west  side  of  the  Tabernacle  would  be  shorter,  and 
were  probably  6  feet  in  length.  It  is  possible  here  to 
gain  a  ray  of  light  on  the  obscurity  in  which  the  two 
corner-boards  stand  in  Exodus  xxvi.  24  and  xxxvi.  29. 
The  mention  of  the  '  one  ring '  in  each  of  these  passages 
lends  itself  to  the  explanation  that,  the  board  being 
entire,  each  of  its  two  sides  should  have  a  ring  for  each 
of  the  two  end-bars  that  supported  that  side.  This  was  all 
that  was  necessary  to  the  security  of  the  whole  (cf.  p.  195). 

1  The  gilding  would  be  done  by  the  usual  Eg}'ptian  method  of  sticking 
rather  thick  gold -toil  firmly  on  to  the  wooden  basis.  Plates  of  gold  beaten 
thin  would  form  the  foil,  and  gum-arabic,  which  is  abundant  in  the  desert, 
the  medium. 


PAET    IV. 

THE  TRIPLE  CUBIT  IN   BABYLONIA 
AND  IN  PALESTINE. 


217 


THE  TRIPLE  CUBIT  ^  BABYLONIA 
AND  IN  PALESTINE. 

ON  the  behalf  of  Part  II.  of  this  book,  it  is  claimed 
that  it  has  established  the  fact  of  there  having 
been  three  ells  or  cubits  of  the  lengths  given.  With  the 
application  of  these  measures  to  Babylonian  antiquities 
we  do  not  now,  except  incidentally,  concern  ourselves. 
This  is  a  work  which  is  necessarily  left  to  others  to 
accomplish. 

On  the  behalf  of  Part  III.,  in  which  the  triple  cubit 
is  applied  to  the  specification  of  a  single  structure  in 
the  Arabian  desert,  it  is  hoped  that  several  points  will 
already  have  made  themselves  clear.  If  the  long-lost 
key  of  an  architectural  enigma  has  been  forged  in  our 
earlier  pages,  it  has  been  practically  applied  to  the 
elucidation  of  some  portions  of  the  world's  earliest 
literature,  with  the  result  that  we  have  recovered,  not 
only  the  actual  size  of  the  Tabernacle  in  the  wilderness 
(and  this  surely  is  much  !),  but  also  that  of  its  true 
accessories  and  adjuncts. 

(A)  Amongst  these  additions  to  our  knowledge  may  be 
named  the  restoration  of  the  north  gate  in  the  court  of 
the  Tabernacle.  It  is  true  that  this  result  does  not  arise 
immediately  out  of  the  application  of  any  specific  measure 


218  THE    TABERNACLE. 

to  the  case.  But  it  has  been  arrived  at  by  the  more 
certain  and  thorough  examination  of  the  documentary 
evidence  before  us,  which  has  been  made  possible  owing 
to  the  possession  of  such  a  measure. 

(B)  Akin  to  this  discovery  is  that  of  the  place  at  the 
east  gate  for  the  *  stranger  that  is  within  thy  gates/  ^ 
it  now  appearing  that  this  injunction  of  the  fourth 
Commandment  applied  solely  to  those  aliens  of  Israel 
who  joined  in  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  without  the 
court,  at  the  eastern  space  set  apart  for  their  use. 

(C)  The  placing  of  the  Altar  of  Sacrifice  on  the  line  of 
the  Soreg  is  entitled  to  mention  in  this  connection,  as  it 
not  only  allows  us  to  differentiate  between  the  altar  and 
the  slope  by  which  it  was  approached,  but  enables  us  to 
locate  the  laver  as  filling  the  space  between  the  platform- 
of-the-altar  and  the  porch-of-the-tent. 

(D)  In  the  tent  of  the  Tabernacle  we  have  two  main 
additions  to  our  knowledge.  One  of  these,  with  the  aid 
of  Josephus,  enables  us  to  see  that  *  the  door  of  the  tent  of 
meeting '  was  not  a  mere  threshold  or  entrance- way,  but 
a  clearly  defined  space,  making  the  sin  of  Eli's  sons  possible 
(1  Samuel  ii.  22),  and  accounting  for  the  restriction  given 
to  Eleazar  and  Ithamar  not  to  trespass  beyond  it. 

In  the  elegant  addition  of  a   porch   to  the  ordinary 


*  The  presence  of  strangers,  both  in  courts  of  law  and  at  the  worship  of 
Jehovah,  was  recognised  in  Exodus  xx,  10  and  xxiii.  9,  and  their  conversion  to 
the  faith  of  Israel  is  contemplated  in  1  Kings  viii.  41-43,  and  Isaiah  Ivi.  3-7. 
They  were  to  be  allowed  to  make  offerings  by  fire  to  Jehovah,  which 
comprised  burnt  bacrifices,  votive  offerings,  and  free-will  offerings.  A 
stringent  rule  forbad  any  distinction  being  made  between  these  offerings 
and  those  of  Hebrews  (2^umbers  xv.  14-16). 


NEW    LIGHT    ON    THE    TABERNACLE.    219 

Bedaween  tent  we  have,  further,  the  solution  of  the 
otherwise  insoluble  problem  of  the  eleven  curtains, 
a  problem  so  old  that  the  Talmud,  in  the  Gemara  on 
the  treatise  Shabat,  thus  states  it : — *  The  eleven  curtains 
were  44  cubits  broad.  Take  away  30  for  the  roof. 
Fourteen  remain.  Take  away  2  for  the  doubling. 
There  remain  12,  which  trailed  upon  the  ground  behind, 
as  a  lady  who  went  into  the  market  and  the  ends  of 
her  dress  followed  her.' 

(E)  Even  more  important  than  this  recovery  of  the 
porch  in  its  bearing  upon  the  future — Solomon's  Porch 
being  its  crown  of  evolution — is  that  of  the  twelve  side- 
chambers,  under  the  eaves  of  the  tent.  These  were  the 
architectural  germs  out  of  which  grew  the  thirty  priestly 
cells  in  the  Temple  of  Solomon,  the  sixty  in  the  Temple 
planned  by  Ezekiel  (twenty  of  which  were  Levitical 
chambers),  and  the  thirty-eight  in  the  Temple  of  Herod. 

Nothing  more  clearly  shows  the  intense  conservatism 
of  the  later  Jewish  hierarchy  and  people  in  all  things 
that  concerned  their  national  faith  than  the  way  in 
which  these  two  cardinal  points,  i.e.  the  porch  and  the 
dormitories  of  their  sacred  buildings,  were  developed 
from  the  model  of  the  Tabernacle,  and  were  not  super- 
added to  it,  as  creations  for  use  and  ornament. 

2.  These  five  principal  discoveries  will  show  how  great 
and  manifold  are  the  results  which  accrue  from  the 
transfer  to  Mosaic  architecture  of  the  linear  measures  of 
Babylonia.  Taken  from  an  age  far  anterior  to  that  of 
Abraham,  it  is  necessary  to  ask  ourselves  if  the  adoption 


220  THE    TABERNACLE. 

and  preservation  of  these  measures  was,  in  every  case, 
complete  and  entire,  and  if  no  modifications  were  made 
in  them  during  the  existence  of  the  theocracy  ? 

(a)  There  is  one  measure,  i.e.  the  fundamental  one, 
which,  while  it  held  its  place  in  the  Tabernacle  and  the 
Temples  unaltered  in  length,  was  yet  subjected  to  a 
different  division,  in  its  largest  fraction,  by  the  Jews. 

We  have  seen,  from  the  second  column  of  the  Senkereh 
tablet,  that  there  were  originally  t/tree  digits  or  fingers  in 
every  *palm.*  It  was  a  natural  and  almost  inevitable 
result  that  in  their  new  home  beside  the  Mediterranean 
the  Hebrews  should  collate  the  fingers  and  the  palm 
(Ezekiel  xl.  43),  and  decide  that  four  fingers  were  the 
equivalent  of  the  palm -breadth.  We  find,  accordingly, 
that  the  hand-breadth  was  repeatedly  used,  as  in  the 
'  border '  given  to  the  table  of  shew-bread  in  the  Taber- 
nacle (Exodus  XXV.  25),  and  in  the  thickness  given  to 
the  casting  of  the  brazen  sea  in  Solomon's  Temple 
(1  Kings  vii.  26).  This  likewise  was,  in  all  probability — 
a  probability  amounting  to  certainty  in  my  own  mind, — 
the  thickness  of  the  castings  made  for  the  pillars  Jachin 
and  Boaz,  which  Jeremiah  tells  us  (lii.  21)  were  hollow 
and  had  a  thickness  of  four  fingers.  Evidence  has  already 
been  given  that  Josephus  reckoned  four  fingers  as  a  palm. 

(b)  In  the  description  of  the  colossal  sea  or  laver  in 
the  Temple  of  Solomon,  we  are  told  in  1  Kings  vii.  24, 
margin,  that  it  was  ornamented  with  open  flower-buds 
placed  *  ten  in  a  cubit.' 

As  the  cubit  for  brass- work  was  the  one  ordinarily  in 
use,  of  14*4  inches,  we  here  obtain  spaces,  in  which  the 


THE    SMALL    CUBIT    AS    A    SPAN.       221 

flowers  were  placed,  of  1*44  inches.  This  was  a  natural 
but  altogether  unique  measure,  as  the  digit  of  Babylonia 
was  1*2  inches,  and  that  of  Palestine  '90  inch.  This 
measure  does  not  appear  elsewhere,  so  far  as  is  known. 

The  10*8  inch  Measure. 

3.  It  will  be  within  the  reader's  cognisance  that  no 
name  is  given  to  either  of  the  three  central  measures  in 
the  Senkereh  tablet  or  on  the  scale  of  Gudea.  They 
have  been  called  '  ells '  as  a  matter  of  convenience, 
but  this  name  has  no  warrant  in  either  of  the  documents 
before  us. 

The  smallest  of  these  three  measures  has,  however, 
been  referred  to  as  a  'span/  This  name  is  taken  from 
a  cuneiform  tablet  in  which  it  is  stated  that  the  walls  of 
Khorsabad  were  24,740  '  spans  '  in  length.  Khorsabad 
was  a  royal  suburb  of  Nineveh,  and  was  built  by 
Sargon  the  Second,  who  reigned  over  Assyria  from 
722  to  705  B.c.i 

The  suburb  was  enclosed  by  its  own  walls,  which 
formed  a  parallelogram  of  more  than  a  mile,  and  are 
still  standing !  The  inscription  of  the  tablet  reads : 
*  Three  ners-and-a-third,  one  stadium,  one  fathom-and- 
a-half,  two  spans :  this  is  the  dimension  of  the  wall.' 
This  capital  inscription  for  the  restoration  of  Assyrian 
measures  has  been  thus  wrought  out  by  Oppert : — 

1  He  is  mentioned  in  Isaiah  xx.  1,  and  was  the  father  of  Sennacherib,  who 
succeeded  liim.  A  popular  account,  with  illustrations,  of  Sargon's  palace  at 
Khorsabad  is  given  in  the  '  Assyria  '  volume  of  The  Story  of  the  Nations, 
pp.  278-294. 


222  THE    TABERNACLE. 

31  ner,  of  7,200  spans  each          =  24,000 

1  stade,  or  tenth  of  ner                  =  720 
^  11  fathoms  of  12  spans,   each 

fathom  being  -^  of  stade      =  18 

2  spans       . .          . .         . .         . .  2 


Total  circuit  of  walls        .  .     24,740  spans. 


The  walls  themselves  have  been  repeatedly  measured, 
with  the  result  that  they  are  known  to  contain  7,422 
yards  of  masonry  ;  there  being  exactly  6,000  spans  or 
1,800  yards  in  each  of  the  shorter  sides,  and  rather  more 
in  the  longer  ones.  If,  therefore,  we  divide  the  total 
length  of  the  wall  by  the  number  of  units  recorded, 
i.e.  22,266  feet  by  24,740,  we  arrive  at  the  result  that 
each  *span'  was  10'8  inches  in  length. 

(a)  It  is  unfortunate  that  the  word  'span '  has  associations 
of  physical  measurement  in  our  language  which  have  led 
to  a  very  general  idea  that  a  span  of  9  inches  was  the  half 
of  a  cubit  of  18  inches.  This  idea  has  no  foundation  in 
Eastern  metrology.  Where  the  half  of  a  cubit  is  meant, 
it  is  so  stated,  as  in  eight  passages  in  Exodus  and  two  in 
Ezekiel.  These  ten  instances  should  lead  us  to  seek  for 
another  meaning  to  the  designation  than  that  it  was  the 
half  of  any  cubit-length.      It  was,  in  fact,  nothing  less 


*  TMs  line  is  a  striking  commentary  on,  and  confirmation  of,  the  result 
Bub-column  (No.  6)  of  the  second  column  of  the  Senkereh  tablet,  which 
shows  a  total  of  twelve  small  ells  of  the  same  length  as  the  '  spans '  here 
referred  to.  It  was,  therefore,  a  table  of  the  fractions  of  a  small  fathom,  as 
well  as  of  the  fractions  of  a  small  ell. 


TESTIMONY    OF    THE    TALMUD.         223 

than  another  way  of  defininof  the  short  cubit.  We  have 
in  the  43rd  chapter  of  Ezekiel's  prophecy  the  two 
measures  placed  in  juxtaposition.  In  verse  13  the 
prophet  states  the  width  of  the  masonry  which  carried 
the  grating  of  the  altar  as  *  a  span'  (=  f^  of  a  foot).  In 
the  next  sentence  but  two  lie  gives  the  width  of  the  altar- 
drain  as  being  half-a-cubit  in  width  (i.e.  ordinary),  which 
is  equivalent  to  |-  of  a  foot,  this  being  the  exact  space  to 
spare  when  all  the  other  measurements  of  the  court  and  of 
the  altar  have  been  accounted  for.  This  should  be  decisive 
as  to  the  distinction  between  the  span  and  the  half  of  any 
one  of  the  three  cubits  derived  from  Babylon. 

(b)  It  has  already  been  shown  (p.  202)  that  a  cubit  of 
three-fourths  the  length  of  another  is  the  only  possible 
explanation  of  the  ten  curtains  of  the  Tabernacle  being 
fitted  into  their  places,  the  reason  being  that  they  alone, 
the  veil  excepted,  were  decorated  with  figures  worked  in 
gold  thread.  It  follows  that  the  Golden  Table  ^  and  the 
Ark  of  the  Covenant  were  designed  by  the  same  measure. 


^  The  Jerusalem  Talmud  states  (Menakhoth  97«)  that  there  were  three 
amehs  or  cubits — 

(1)  The  smallest,  of  5  hand-breadths,  measured  the  vessels  of  the  Temple. 

(2)  The  medium,  of  6  hand-breadths,  measured  the  buildings,  and  consisted 

of  two  spans. 

(3)  (The  length  of  the  third  is  not  given.) 

If  to  these  hand-breadths  we  give  a  width  of  3*6  inches,  the  small  cubit 
will  have  18  inches  and  the  medium  21-6  inches,  the  half  of  which  was 
a  span.  These  details  were  those  of  the  Eg\-ptian  cubits,  and  were  thus, 
when  written,  modern  glosses  on  foundations  of  historical  truth.  "We  may  be 
grateful  for  the  general  support  they  give  to  these  pages,  as  to  the  difference 
of  a  palm  between  one  cubit  and  another,  and  of  the  uses  to  which  two  of 
them  were  put. 


224  THE    TABERNACLE. 

The  latter  was  an  oblong  box  of  2 J  cubits  (=  27  inches) 
in  length,  its  height  and  breadth  being  each  IJ  cubits 
(=  16*2  inches).  These  measures  are  given  by  Joseph  us 
as  being  respectively  five  and  three  '  spans.'  Here  is  the 
root  of  much  misapprehension,  caused  probably  by  the 
Greek  scribes  employed  by  Josephus  to  translate  his  work 
being  familiar  with  the  Egyptian  cubit  of  21*6  inches,^ 
of  which  the  span  was  exactly  one-half.  Instead  of 
dividing  these  figures,  or  giving  them  in  cubits,  as  is 
done  with  regard  to  the  Golden  Altar  of  Incense,  this 
error,  arising  from  mental  indolence  or  confusion,  has 
come  down  to  us,  with  widely  misleading  effects. 

(c)  Elsewhere  the  language  of  Josephus  is  irreproach- 
able, as  in  the  case  of  the  height  of  Goliath.  Samuel 
(1 :  xvii,  4)  tells  us  that  his  height  was  '  six  cubits  and 
a  span.'     These  being  commensurated  thus  : — 

6  cubits,  each  14*4  inches  .  .    =:    SQ-4:  inches. 

1  span      ..  ..  ..  ..    =   108       „ 

give  us  a  total  of    .  .  .  .  97*2       „ 


In  the  Septuagint  translation  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  dates  from  the  close  of  the  third  century  B.C.,  and 
in  the  Antiquities  of  Josephus,  belonging  to  the  close  of 
the  first  century  a.d.,  Goliath's  height  is  given  at  '  4  cubits 

^  Edersheim  has  remarked  that  the  representation  of  the  Shew-bread  Table 
on  the  Arch  of  Titus  is  less  in  size  than  we  should  expect  from  its  description. 
His  cubit  was  one  of  18  mches.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  some  future  visitor 
to  Eome  will  test  its  dimensions  by  a  cubit  of  10-8  inches,  and  make  public 
the  result. 


THE    STATURE    OF    GOLIATH.  225 

and  a  span/  There  is,  however,  no  real  discrepancy 
here  with  our  English  Bibles,  when  once  the  metrology 
of  the  subject  is  understood  in  its  geographical  and 
chronological  relations.  The  'cubit,'  as  understood  by 
the  Greeks  (the  word  itself  being  the  ammah  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  the  ammatu  of  the  Assyrians),  was  that 
of  the  Egj'ptiaus,  with  whom  they  had  more  intimate 
relations  than  with  the  Jews.  The  Egyptian  cubit  being 
one  of  21*6  inches,  the  height  of  Goliath  was  best 
expressed,  for  Greek  readers,  in  its  length.  Not  to  have 
done  so  would  have  been  to  mislead,  and  to  excite  ridicule 
and  doubt.     Hence  we  have  this  commensuration : — 

4  cubits,  each  21'6  inches  .  .    =  86-4  inches. 

1  span,  or  half-cubit        .  .  .  .    =   108       „ 

Total  as  before         , ,  ,  .    =  97*2      „    ^ 


(d)  The  short  measure  before  us  is  thus  seen  to  have 
several  Scripture  names,  being  called  '  cubit '  in  the 
description  of  the  golden  furniture  of  the  Tabernacle, 
'  span '  in  the  size  of  the  High-priest's  breastplate  and 
in  the  height  of  Goliath.  It  has  also  a  third  designation 
in  the  Book  of  Judges  (iii.  16),  where  Ehud  is  said  to 
have  made  a  dagger  of  a  cubit  or  span  in  length.  The 
word  gomed  occurs  here  only  in  the  Hebrew  scriptures, 
and  is  taken  to  mean  a  short  cubit,  as  in  the  Greek 
translation  of  the  LXX.  the  translation  gives  *  span  or 

^  The  height  of  Goliath  was  thus  S-i^o  English  feet,  which  is  somewhat 
less  than  that  of  the  Chinese  giant,  Chwang,  lately  exhibited  in  Europe, 
whose  height  was  8  ft.  6  ins. 


226  THE    TABEIl]S"ACLE. 

half-cubit/  in  accordance  with  what  is  said  above.  The 
fact  that  he  made  it  of  this  length  shows  that  he 
consecrated  it  to  what  he  deemed  to  be  the  highest 
patriotic  purpose,  as  this  was  the  most  sacred  cubit  of 
the  Jews,  being  that  of  the  vessels  of  the  sanctuary. 


The  14'4  inch  Measure. 

4.  This  was  the  common  measure,  by  which  everything 
not  excepted  in  the  goldsmith's  and  surveyor's  depart- 
ments was  measured. 

We  have  seen  that  it  applies  to  the  height  of  Goliath. 
It  was  that  '  cubit  of  a  man '  by  which  we  are  to  read  the 
size  of  the  sarcophagus  of  Og,  king  of  Bashan.  Being 
four  cubits  in  width,  it  was  4|-  feet,  and  being  nine  cubits 
in  length,  it  was  10-|-  feet.  These  measures  are  large,  but 
are  not  marvellous,  and  they  are  not  given  as  those  of  his 
physical  proportions. 

This  was  emphatically  the  builders'  cubit,  and  after 
having  gone  through  every  item  of  every  building 
specification  in  the  Bible,  I  can  state  that  it  requires  no 
modification,  nor,  if  a  single  clerical  error  in  Ezekiel  be 
excepted,  does  it  fail  to  yield  good  and  true  results  in 
every  case. 

(a)  Some  walls  of  Babylon,  described  by  Herodotus 
(i.  178),  were  possibly  built  by  this  measure.  We  know, 
from  late  German  researches,  not  yet  concluded,  that  the 
walls  in  question  were  not  those  of  the  city,  but  of  the 
citadel.  He  does  not  say  more  than  that  *A  wall  has 
been  raised  to  the  height  of  two  hundred  cubits,  with 


THE    CUBITS    OF    HEEODOTUS.         227 

a  width  of  fifty.     Now  the  royal  cubit  is  longer  than 
the  average  cubit  by  three  fingers/  ^ 

If  a  cubit  of  an  English  foot-and-a-fifth  be  understood, 
the  measures  will  be  240  feet  and  60  feet.  If  the  cubit 
of  a  foot- and- a-half  be  used,  they  will  be  300  feet  and 
75  feet.  Neither  of  these  results  was  impossible  of 
attainment  for  an  inner  fortress,  but  the  smaller  is  the 
likelier.  What  alone  at  present  is  certain  is  that  the 
walls  of  the  citadel  were  not  built  with  the  span  of 
Khorsabad,  and  that  these  through  measures  were  not 
those  of  the  famous  walls  of  the  city  of  Babylon,  but  of 
its  central  citadel. 

The  18  inch  Measure. 

5.  Certain  portions  of  Ezekiel's  specification  are  written 
in  large  cubits,  the  fact  being  in  every  case  notified.  In 
addition  to  the  ground -areas  of  the  courts  of  the  Temple 
being  uniformly  given  in  18  inch  cubits,  the  measure- 
ments of  the  Great  Altar  of  Sacrifice  are  so  given. 
Likewise  those  of  the  outer  wall,  its  steps,  and  the  east 
entrance-gate  and  its  lodges.  With  these  exceptions  the 
large  cubit,  in  his  pages,  is  invariably  one  of  open  spaces. 
This  fact  is  one  which  is  capable  of  demonstration,  but 
the  demonstration  is  involved  with  that  of  other  lengths 
referred  to  in  these  pages,  and  with  some  not  mentioned, 
but  which  were  used  in  the  building  of  the  Herodian 

^  This  is  independent  testimony  as  to  the  primary  division  of  the  palm  into 
three  fractions,  as  shown  in  Part  II.  of  this  Tolume  (pp.  124,  148).  It  may 
be  an  aid  to  the  memory  to  know  that  each  of  these  fractions  or  '  fingers '  was 
one-tenth  of  an  English  foot  in  length. 


228 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


Temple.  The  proof  is  one  that  is  too  long  for  these  pages, 
but  if  opportunity  offers  it  will  be  made  public,  so  that  all 
may  judge  of  the  case  as  a  whole,  as  bearing  upon  the  use 
of  this  family  of  measures  in  the  Holy  Land. 

(a)  Turning  to  Babylon,  from  which  they  were  derived, 
we  find  an  incontrovertible  embodiment  of  the  large  cubit 
in  the  Great  Tower  of  Nebo,  at  Borsippa,  near  the  ruins 
of  Babylon.     This  ancient  temple  is  now  known  as  the 


'  /  /  /  /^  //  /.  '  ' 


Reconstruction  Plan  of  the  Birs-Nimroud. 
Scale,  50  feet  to  half  an  inch.     1  cubit  =  1.J  feet. 

mound  of  Birs-Nimroud^  and  has  been  more  carefully 
examined  than  any  other  Babylonian  ruin.  Sir  Henry 
Rawlinson's  account  of  it  is  contained  in  the  eighteenth 
volume  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society's  Journal  {old  style). 
From  this  it  appears  that  the  partially-erected  tower  had 
stood  for  500  years,  when  Nebuchadnezzar,  about  600  B.C., 
determined  on  its  completion. 

It  is  possible  to  deduce  from  the  data  arrived  at,  all  its 
proportions  as  they  were  originally  designed.     These  are 


THE    BIRS-NIMROUD. 


229 


most  briefly  stated  in  a  series  of  tables  of  distances — all 
the   cubits   used   being   of    the    length   of   18   inches  — 
accompanied  by  a  drawing  of  the  tower,  as  it  must  have 
appeared  in  outline  when  completed. 
The  tables  are  as  follows  : — 


1.    Measures  of  Stages  and  Terraces. 


1.  Height  of  basement 

2.  Width  of  rear  terraces .  . 

3.  Width  of  basement  side-terraces 

4.  Height  of  upper  stages 

5.  Width  of  upper  side-terraces  .  . 

6.  Height  of  lower  stages.  , 

7.  Width  of  front  terraces 


6  cubits  =   9    feet. 


8 
9 

10 
14 

18 
20 


=  12 


>2      n 


=  15 
=  21 

=  27 
=  30 


2.    Squares  of  Brickwork — Sizes. 

1.  Foundation  basement,  a  square  of  200  cubits=  300  feet. 

2.  First,  or  lowest,  stage 

3.  Second  stage 

4.  Third  stage 

5.  Fourth  stage 

6.  Fifth  stage.  . 

7.  Sixth  stage, . 

8.  Seventh  stage 


182 

=  273 

154 

=  231 

126 

=  189 

98 

=  147 

70 

=  105 

42 

=  63 

14 

=  21 

It  is  thus  seen  that  not  only  were  all  the  distances 
governed  by  a  common  denominator  of  18  inches,  but 
that  the  reduction  in  size  was  accomplished  by  making 
each   stage  28  cubits  less  in  the   square   than   the  one 


230 


THE    TABERNACLE. 


immediately  below  it,  the  foundation  basement  being 
18  cubits  larger  than  the  stage  immediately  above  it. 
The  top  of  the  tower  was  a  plain  surface  of  21  feet 
each  way. 


Geometric  Principle  of  the  Tabernacle  Tent. 

{The  shaded  portion  represents  the  proportions  of  the  Tent  oj 

the  Tahernacle.y 

1  The  diameter  of  this  circle  is  3*6  inches,  and  is  drawn  so  as  to  act  as 
a  standard  of  measure  for  the  breadth  of  the  human  palm,  which  is  believed 
to  be  the  fundamental  of  all  length -measures.  Each  reader  may  test  its 
correctness,  as  an  average,  by  placing  his  own  hand  over  it. 


IJN^FLUENCE    OF    BABYLON    IN    ASIA.     231 

(b)  Measures  apart,  the  point  at  which  this  ancient 
structure  touches  the  architecture  of  the  Jews  lies  in  this 
fact : — The  total  height  of  the  Birs  is  estimated  to  have 
been  100  cubits,  or  150  feet ;  the  total  width  to  have  been 
200  cubits,  or  300  feet.  It  is  in  exactly  these  proportions 
that  the  Tabernacle  in  the  Wilderness  was  erected,  its 
height  being  15  cubits  and  its  width  being  30  cubits. 

The  predominance  of  the  Babylonia  cycle  of  60  and 
its  fractions,  in  the  constituents  of  the  Tabernacle,  is  too 
apparent  to  have  escaped  the  reader's  notice.  The  one 
exception  is  the  length  of  *  an  hundred  cubits '  given  to 
the  court.  It  is  now,  however,  apparent  that  the  court 
consisted  of  two  squares  of  fifty  cubits  each,  so  that  this 
exception  to  the  rule  of  sixties  is  more  apparent  than  real. 
By  the  form  of  the  specification,  attention  is  called  to  the 
fact  that  all  parts  of  the  court  had  an  equal  sanctity. 

Not  less  significant  than  these  coincidences  is  the  fact 
that  the  twelve  uprights  of  the  Tabernacle,  i.e.  its  pillars, 
were  arranged  in  groups  of  three,  four,  and  five  ;  thus 
recalling  to  mind  the  allocation  of  palms  in  cubits  of 
three,  four,  andfive^  hand-breadths.  The  discovery  of  this 
last-mentioned  fact  has  led  to  the  conclusions  of  these 
pages.  Other,  and  still  more  important  ones,  are  to 
follow  in  subsequent  volumes  from   the   same  premises.^ 

'  These  figures  being  multiplied  together  give  the  cycle  of  60.  The 
far-reaching  influence  of  Babylonian  supremacy  in  Asia  is  seen  in  the  fact 
that  the  Chinese  and  the  Hindoos  of  to-day  reckon  the  passage  of  their  years 
in  periods  of  60,  and  not  in  hundreds.  The  native  Chinese  also  have  three 
yard  measures  in  common  use. 

2  Cf.  footnote  to  p.  168. 


232 


INDEX, 


Aaron,  death  of,ll, 13, 14. 

genealogy  of,  102. 

death    of    his    elder 
sons,  211. 
Aaronites,  89. 
Abiathar,  84,  99. 
Abinadab,  66. 
Abishag,  98. 
Adasa,  55. 

Adonijah,  request  of,  98. 
Aher,  91. 
Ahijah,  33,  81. 
Ahimelech,  52,  103,  199. 
Ahitub,  30,  33,  34. 
Ai,  54. 

Aijalon,  92,  96. 
A  in  Kadis,  6. 
Ain  Kdrim,  32. 
Ain  Muhil,  95. 
Ain  Surah,  49. 
Aith,  54. 

Altar  of  burnt- offering,  74. 
Altar  of  sacrifice,  the,  178. 

position  of,  181. 
Amariah,  33. 
Amorites,  battle  with,  9. 
Anuta,  54,  55. 
Anathoth,  55. 
Anem,  94,  96. 
Aner,  92,  96. 
Ani»,  94. 

Aphek,  battle  at,  27. 
Apostacy  of  Israel,  27. 
Arad,  9. 

destruction  of,  15. 

king  of,  hostility  of, 
15. 
Ariel,  181. 
Arimathfea,  51. 
Aristobulus,  103. 


Arithmetic,  ancient  system 

of,  125. 
Ark,  position  of,  21. 
size  of,  224. 
at  Ebenezer,  28. 
at  Ear  j  ath- Jearim,  3 3. 
at  Ophel,  77. 
removed  to  Jerusalem, 

65,  72. 
moved  to  Moriah,  101. 
Arnon,  the,  88. 
Asaph,  PsaJm  of,  quoted, 
29. 

sonsof,68;dutyof,70. 
Ashtaroth,  93. 
Assyrians,  approach  of,  to 

Jerusalem,  54. 
Atonement-money,  the,  7  3 . 
Azanah  V.,  34. 

Baalath-beer,  37. 
Babylonians,  notation  of, 

li9,  230. 
Badiet  et-Tih,  6. 
Bamoth,  17. 
Barclay,  on  tent  curtains, 

191. 
Be-eshterah,  93. 
Beer,  17. 
Beer-lahai-roi,  9. 
Beeroth,  59. 
Beeroth-bene-Jaakan,  9. 
Bene-Jaakan,  8,  9. 
Benjamin,  cities  of,  59. 
Benjamites,  migration  of, 

63. 
Bered,  9. 
Beth-Car,  32. 
Beth-Shemesh,  27. 
Bethhoron,  92. 


Bethlehem,  49. 
Bezalel,  30. 
Bezer,  88. 
Bileam,  96. 
Bir-el-Ozeiz,  62. 
Birs-Nimroud,  228  sq. 
Boards  of  Tabernacle,  4, 

194  sq. 
Bowls  of  Tabernacle,  5. 
Bozrah,  89. 

Brasen    altar,    dedication 
of,  5. 

construction  of,  30. 

moveable,  74. 

description  of,  78  sq. 

approach  to,  180. 

bosom  of,  181. 

position  of,  181. 

platform  of,  182. 
Brasen  sea,  the,  220. 
BreechesBible.on  curtains, 

204. 
Buttons  (taches),  206. 

Caleb,  23. 

Canaanites,  destruction  of, 

16. 
Causeway,  the,  77. 
Census  of  the  people,  72. 
Chambers  of  the  priests  ,80. 
of  the  Temple,  210, 
219. 
Chenaniah,  68,  87. 
Cherubs,  the,  200. 
Christ,therockatypeof,13. 
Cities,  number  of,  97. 
Cities  of  refuge,  the,  88.- 
City  of  David,  64. 
Clasps,  206. 
Cloud,  the  guiding,  6. 


INDEX. 


233 


Colours   of  the  curtains, 

187,  188. 
Cords,  the,  209. 
Courses    of    priests    and 

Levites,  84. 
Court  of  Tabernacle,  167. 
Courts  of  justice  in  Israel, 

35,  41. 
Cubits,  three  in  number, 

161. 
Curtains,  the,   175,  185, 

187,  188,  202,  208. 
Cuts   of  Rule  of   Gudea, 

147  sq. 

Dan,  removal  of,  91. 

towns  of,  91. 
David,  55  sq. 

genealogy  of,  57. 
elected  king,  64. 
his  house,  64. 
at  Oman's  threshing- 
floor,  73. 
hands  pattern  of  the 
Temple  toSolomon, 
83. 
his  revision  of  Church 
property,  97. 
Dedication,  week  of,  5. 
Delilement  of  High-priest, 

103. 
Deir  Abdn,  33. 
Deir  Man,  33. 
Deir  el-Hawa,  32. 
Digit,  the,  148,  220. 
Dimnah,  95. 
Door  of  the  tent,  173,188. 

screen  of,  189. 
Doorkeepers,    courses   of, 

76,  86. 
Drawings  of  the  plans  for 
the  Temple,  78. 

East,  the,  approach  from, 

180. 
Ea.st  Gate,  the,  175. 
Ebenezer,  27,  32. 
Edersheim,     on    Temple 

music,    88 ;    on  shew- 

bread  table,  224. 
Edom,  message  to,  16. 
conduct  of,  17. 


Egj-ptian  cubit,  225. 
Ehud,  dagger  of,  225. 
Eleazar,  duty  of,  4. 
Eleph,  58. 
El-Jeib,  19. 
El- Jib,  55,  59,  60. 
EU,  27  ;  death  of,  178. 
Ell,  the,  121,  135. 
Ellar,  92. 
Elteke,  92. 
Embroidery,  200. 
En-gannim,  94,  96. 
En-Mishpat,  9. 
Enclosure  of   the  Taber- 
nacle, the,  169. 
Ephod,  the,  199. 
Ephraim,  conduct  of,  23. 

towns  of,  91. 
Er  Ram,  5o. 

Er-Edmeh,  38,  42  sq.,  94. 
Erech,  118. 
Es  Sanamein,  89. 
Eshcol,  48. 
Et  Tell,  54. 

Ezekiersspecification,227. 
Ezion-Geber,  10. 

Father  of  a  city,  mean- 
ing of,  57. 

Fence,  see  Soreg. 

Fergusson,  Mr.  J.,  on 
'gate,'  177  ;  on  cur- 
tains, 187. 

Finger,  the,  148,  220. 

Floor  of  the  Tabernacle, 
193. 

Forty  days  in  the  Mount, 
the,  184. 

Forty  years'  wanderings, 
the,  7  sq. 

Fractions     of     Senkereh 
tablet,  123. 
table  of,  154. 

Gallim,  55. 

Gate,  meaning  of,  177. 

Gath-rimmon,  92,  96. 

Geba,  54,  63. 

Gebim,  55. 

Genealogies   of  chiefs  of 

choirs,  72. 
Gershonites,  duty  of,  4. 


Gershonites,  turns  of,  70. 

towns  of,  93. 
Gibbethon,  92,  93. 
Gibeah,  60. 
Gibeah-of-God,  50. 
Gibeah  of  Saul,  55. 
Gibeon,  55,  61. 

Tabernacle  at,  56. 

supercession  of,  90. 

closing    services    at, 
lOU. 
Gibeonites,war  against,  59. 
Gilding,  mode  oi,  213. 
Gilgal,  22  sq. 

abandoned,  52. 
Gittaim,  67. 
Gold,  value  of,  73. 
Goliath,  height  of,  225. 
Great  reed,  the,  137. 
Greek  cubit,  the,  225. 
Grove,  G.,  quoted,  22. 
Guards  of  the  sanctuary, 
76  ;  of  the  Temple,  82. 
Gudea,    king,    statue  of, 

144  sq. 
Gudea,  scale  of,  restoration 

of,  140  sq. 
Guest-chambers,  47. 

JSalasah,  9. 
Hammon,  93. 
Hammoth-dor,  93. 
Hand,  the,  use  of,  125. 
Hangings,  the,  169,  175. 
Hanina,  54. 
Ear  el,  181. 
Haupt,   Professor  P.,  on 

Rule  of  Gudea,  145. 
Hazeroth,  7. 
Hebron,  38  sq. 

ruins  near,  43. 
Helkath,  94,  96. 
Heman,  sons  of,  68. 

clan  of,  71. 
Herodotus,  on  the  cubit, 
148  ;      on     walls      of 
Babylon,  226. 
High -priest,  transference 
of  office,  26. 

duty  of,  99. 

genealogy  of,  102, 

reserved,  103. 


234 


THE   TABERNACLE. 


Hobab,  35. 

Holy  of  Holies,  the,  79. 
Holy  Place,  the,  79. 
Hommel,     on     Senkereh 

tablet,  119;  on  Kule  of 

Gudea,  145. 
Hophni,  death  of,  28. 
Hor,  Mount,  «,  U. 
Hor-haggidgad,  8,  14. 
Honnah,  9,  16. 
Horse  Gate,  Jerusalem,64. 
Hosah,  70. 

Hosea,  on  Gibeah,  61. 
Houses  of  the  Temple,  79. 
Hukok,  94,  96. 
Hunin,  pass  of,  7. 
Hushim,  91. 

Ibleam,  92. 
Ichabod,  33. 
Ideographs    of    Senkereh 

tablet,  132  sq. 
Ime,  21. 
Incense,  offering  of,  99, 

100. 
Isaiah,      on     march    of 

Assyrians,  54. 
Ish-bosheth,  55. 
Isshiah,  87. 
Ithamar,  5,  33. 
Itinerary  of  wanderings,  7. 
lye-abarim,  21. 
Izim,  21. 

Jahzah,  94. 

Jarmuth,  93. 

Jeba,  54,  59. 

Jebel  Afoderah,  15,  18. 

Jebus,  50. 

Jedutliun,  sons  of,  68. 

Jehdeiah,  87. 

Jeiel,  57. 

Jemn,  94. 

Jerusalem      Talmud     on 

cubits,  223. 
Jethro,  35. 
Jibia,  59. 
Joab,  death  of,  99. 
Jukmeam,  92. 
Jokneam,  92,  95. 
Jordan,  arrival  at,  13. 
crossing  of,  21. 


Josephus,  on  the  Taber- 
nacle, 187  sq. 
Journeyings  of  Israel,  the 
start,  5. 
Paran,  6. 
Zm,  6. 

Kadesh,  6  ;  first  stay 
at,  7;  first  departure 
from,   10  ;    second 
arrival  at,  11;  last 
journey  from,  13. 
itinerary,  7. 
first  year  of,  9. 
defeat  by  Am orites,  9. 
murmurings,  the,  12. 
arrival  at  Jordan,  13. 
Mount  Hor,  14. 
destruction  of  Arad, 

15. 
turn  from  Edom,  17. 
stages  of,  18  sq. 
Judges ,  app  ointment  of ,  8  7 . 
Jutta,  38. 

Kades,  89. 

Kadesh-Bamea,     Israel's 
stay  at,  7. 

situation  of,  8. 

names  of,  9. 

second  stay  at,  11. 
Kadis,  first  stay  at,  7. 
Kdna,  95. 
Kartah,  95,  96. 
Kartan,  93. 
Kattath,  95. 
Kedesh,  93. 
Kedesh-in- Galilee,  89. 
Khun  Haiydn,  54. 
Khorsabad,  221. 
Kibroth-hattaavah,  7. 
Kibzaim,  92,  96. 
King's  House,  Jerusalem, 

64. 
Kiriathaim,  93. 
Kirj'ath-Arba,  38. 
Kirjath- Jearim,  ark  at,  33. 
Kish,  57. 
Kishion,  93. 
Kohath,  children  of,  duty 

of,  3,  24,  71. 
Korahites,  the,  82. 
Kmur  Beshaer,  88. 


Lag  ASH  or  Lagas,  141. 

Laish,  91. 

Laishah,  55. 

Larsam  or  Larsa,  118. 

Lebonah,  24. 

Length-measures,  Baby- 
lonian, summary  of,  155. 

Levites,  courses  of,  84. 
census  of,  98. 

Le\itical  cities,  96. 

Lifta,  58. 

Line,  the,  121. 

Loftus,  Mr.  W.  K.,  dis- 
covery of,  118. 

Loops,  the,  202. 

Zubban,  24. 

Maachah,  57. 

Madmenah,  55. 

3Iaisleh,  93. 

Makhrun,  54. 

Mamre,  48. 

Mashal,  93. 

Massah,  murmuring  at,  12. 

Matri,  58. 

Mattanah,  17. 

Matthevf  on  Ramah,  50. 

Measure  of  10*8  inches, 
221  sq.  ;  14-4  inches, 
226;  18  inches,  227. 

Merarites,  duties  of,  4,  71. 
cities  of,  94. 

Meribah-of-Kadesh,  9. 
murmuring  at,  12. 

Meriboth-Kadesh,  9. 

Mesopotamia,     length- 
measures  of,  161. 

Michmash,  54. 

Migron,  54. 

Misappi-ehension,  a,  13. 

Mishal,  93. 

Mizpah,  assembly  of  Tribes 
at,  31,51. 

Moab,  13  ;  conduct  of,  17. 

Moriah,  Mount,  64. 

Moserah,  14. 

Moseroth,  14. 

Moses,  death  of,  13. 

Muka}7ar,  118. 

Miikhmas,  54. 

Mui-muring  of  Israel,  the, 
12. 


INDEX. 


235 


Music,  guilds  of,  68. 
Musicians,    appointment 
of,  87. 

Nabal,  6. 

Nadab,  93. 

Nahalal,  95,  96. 

Nahaliel,  17. 

I^ahshou,  49. 

Is'aioth,  48. 

Nebo,  Tower  of,  228  sq. 

Ntby  Satmvil,  31. 

Negeb,  the,  15. 

Ner,  57. 

Nob,  Tabernacle  at,  52  sq. 

massacre  at,  61. 
North  Gate,  the,  170. 

Obed-Edom,  67. 

Oboth,  20. 

Og,     king     of     Bashan, 

sarcophagus  of,  226. 
Omri,  93. 
Ophel,  64. 
Oppert,  Dr.,  on  Assyrian 

span,  145  ;   on  Assyrian 

measures,  221. 
Oman's     threshing  -  floor 

becomes  the  site  of  the 

Temple,  73. 

Pahath-Moab,  99. 
Palestine  cubit,  the,  161. 
Palm,  the,  122,  134. 

table  of  fractions  of, 
154. 
Paran,  wilderness  of,  6. 
Parbar,  the,  77. 
PareuthesisinDeut.x.,  15. 
Parthenon,  the,  plan  of,  79. 
Pashhur,  34. 
Passages  of  the  Hebrews, 

21. 
Pattern  of  the  Temple,  78. 
Paul,  quotation  of,  13. 
Petra,  16. 
Petrie,       Professor,      on 

talents,  194. 
Phalti,  55. 
Fhanon,  19. 
Philistines,  war  with,  27 

sq.,  81. 


Philo,  182. 

Phinehas,  death  of,  28. 
Pillars  of  Tabernacle,  169. 
Pinches,  Dr.,  on  the  great 

reed,  137 ;  on  ideographs, 

132. 
Pins,  208,  209. 
Plus,  the  sign  of,  138. 
Porch,  the,  79,  187. 
Porpoise  hides,    covering 

of,  191. 
Porters   of    the    Temple, 

duty  of,  86. 
Priests,  clans  of,  70. 

courses  of,  84. 
Procession    bringing    the 

ArktoJerusalem,66,68. 
Psalm  of  Asaph  quoted,  29. 

of  Da\'id,  69. 
Punon,  19. 

Rabbins  on  curtains,  204, 

219. 
Rachel,  tomb  of,  49. 
Ram-skins,  the,  190. 
Ramah,  36  sq. 
Ramathaim-Zophim,  39. 
Rumet  el-KhulU,  42,  49. 
Ramoth,  93. 
Ramoth-in-Gilead,  89. 
Ras-el-Ain,  93. 
Rawlinson,  Sir  H.,  119, 

138. 
JReimun,  89. 
Remeth,  94. 
Reuel,  35. 
Bimmon  or  Rimmono,  95, 

96. 
Robinson,    Dr.    E.,     on 

Rumet,  near  Hebron,  42. 
Rock,     the,    a    tj-pe    of 

Christ,  13. 
Rooms  of  the  Temple,  79. 
Rule  of  Gudea,  144  sq. 
Rummunch,  95. 

Sacrifices   discontinued, 
10. 

slaughter  of,  71. 

place  of,  172. 
Salma,  49. 
Salt  Sea,  the,  14. 


Samuel,  27,  30. 

as  judge,  35. 

builds  an  altar,  40. 

his     interview     with 
Saul,  46. 

caUof,  211. 
Sargon  II.,  221. 
Sarzec,   M.  de,  discovery 

of,  141  sq. 
Saul,  journey  of,  46. 

death  of,  55. 

genealogy  of,  57. 
Sayce,  Professor,  on  hiero- 
glyphs, 137,  139. 
Screen  of  Tabernacle,  4, 

173. 
Sea-calves,  skins  of,  192. 
Sebaita,  16. 
Secu,  well  of,  48. 
Seililn,  25. 

platform  at,  168. 
Senkereh,  118. 
Senkereh  tablet,  glossary 
of,  107  sq. 

reconstruction,  1 1 8sq. 

description  of,  120. 

contents  of,  120  sq. 

fractions  of,  123. 

signs  used  in,  126  sq. 

reverse  of,  151. 
Sennacherib,  march  of,  54. 
Sentence  on  Israelites,  1 1 . 
Sentinels  of  the  altar,  82. 
Sexagesimal     system     of 

Babvionia,  151. 
Shalluiu,  103. 
Shebuel,  81. 
Shechem,  39,  89. 
Shekel,  value  of,  73. 
Shelah,  81. 

migration  of  descend- 
ants of,  99. 
Shelomoth,  81. 
Shen,  33. 

Shiloh,  site  of  the  tent  at, 
24  sq. 

historv  of,  25. 

platform  at,  168. 
Shuham,  91. 
Signs  of  Senkereh  tablet, 

126  sq. 
Silver,  value  of,  73. 


236 


THE   TABEENACLE. 


Singers,  courses  of,  85. 

Sirah  Well,  49. 

Sixties,  system  of,  15 1,231. 

Sockets,  the,  194. 

Solomon,  wife  of,  64. 
anointed  king,  84. 
reign  of,  98. 

Song,  service  of,  71. 

So)-eg  or  fence,  the  origin 
of,  173. 

position  of,  182. 

/So5sws,  the,  119, 121,  132. 

Span,  the,  221. 

Spies,  the,  joiu'ney  of,  7. 

Spoons  of  Tabernacle,  5. 

StabUity   of    the  Taber- 
nacle, 205. 

Store  -  chambers    of    the 
Temple,  80. 

Strangers  in  the  gate  of  the 
Tabernacle  court,  218. 

Summary  of  conclusions, 
217  sq. 

Surur,  28. 

Snweintt,  54. 

Sword  of  Goliath  given  to 
David,  56. 

Taanach,  92,  96. 
Taanath-Shiloh,  25. 
Taberah,  7. 
Tabernacle,  set  up,  3. 
parts  of,  3  sq. 
vessels  of,  5, 
site  of,  at  Jiljulieh, 

22. 
erection  of,  22. 
at  Shiloh,  24. 
re  -  erection     of,     at 

Gilgal,  30. 
taken  from  Gilgal,  52. 
at  Nob,  52  sq. 
removed   to   Gibeon, 

56,58,61. 
David's,at  Jerusalem, 

65  sq. 
two  in  Israel,  69. 
service  of  song  in,  71. 
sacrifices  in,  71. 
furniture    carried    to 

Jerusalem,  100. 
worship  iu^ceases,  101, 


adjuncts    and  acces- 
sories of,  159  sq. 
date  of,  164. 
court  of,  167. 
enclosure  and  hang- 
ings of,  169  sq. 
pillars  of,  169. 
the  North  Gate,  170. 
place  of  sacrifice,  172. 
the  door  of,  173. 
screen  of,  173. 
the/Sor^^  or  fence,  1 73. 
the  East  Gate,  175. 
hangings  of,  175. 
the  brasen  altar,  1 78sq. 
position     of,    in    its 

court,  182. 
measurements  of,  183. 
the  tent,  183  sq. 
section  of  inner  court, 

183. 
the  ten  curtains,  202. 
the   eleven   curtains, 

185  sq. 
the  porch,  187. 
parts  of,  187. 
the  door,  188. 
the  ram-skins,  190. 
covering  of  porpoise 

hides,  191. 
floor  of,  193. 
places  of  the  veil  and 

screen,  197. 
the  veil,  198. 
the   tent-poles,    202, 

205. 
ventilation    of,    203, 

207. 
stability  of,  205. 
how  the  curtains  were 

hung,  208. 
the  pins,  209. 
the  cords,  209. 
the  priests'  chambers, 
210. 
Table  of  squares,  119. 
Tablet  of  Khorsabad,  221. 
Tabor,  95,  96. 
Taches,  206. 
Tell  Arad,  9. 
Tell  'Ashterak,  93. 
Tell  el'Ful,  53. 


Tell  Jiljulieh,  22. 
Tell  Keimun^  92. 
Telloh,  141. 

Temple,  the  plans  for,  78. 
dedication  of,  1 00. 
building  begun,  100. 
Tenons,  the,  194,  212. 
Tent,     the    site    of,     at 

Jiljulieh,  22. 
Tent  of  Tabernacle,  183. 
Tent-poles,  the,  202,  205. 
Threshing-floor  of  Oman, 

becomes  site  of  brasen 

altar,  73  sq. 
Treasuries  of  the  Temple, 

79,  80,  81. 

Uru-salim,  64. 
Uzzah,  death  of,  66. 

Veil,  the,  198. 
Vessels  of  Tabernacle,  5. 

Wady-el-Arish,  66. 
Wady  Ghnrub,  28. 
Wady  Hessi,  18,  21. 
Wady  Ismail,  33. 
Wady  Qadees  or  Kadis,  6. 
Walled      and      unwalled 

cities,  39. 
Walls  at  Hebron,  43  sq. 
Warka,  118. 
Weaving,  199. 
Wilderness  of  Wandering, 

6. 
Wiseman,    Mr.     S.,    on 
cubits,  161. 

YaMk,  94. 
Yarmuk,  94. 
Yebla,  92. 
Terka,  94. 

Zadok,  34. 

Zalmonah,  19. 

Zechariah,  76,  77,  173. 

Zelah,  58. 

Zephath  destruction  of  ,1 6. 

Zered,  10. 

Zin,  7,  9. 

Zophai,  39  sq. 

Zuph,  39  sq.,  oO. 


Date  Due 


ApB-  41 


*^^^^iMf' 


i 


BS1196.5.T2C2 

The  Tabernacle;  its  history  and 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1   1012  00012  0131 


